Click Official ELI Links
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - SoylentGreen

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 84
61
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New Topic: "ELI After Dark"
« on: January 30, 2013, 01:54:57 PM »



S.G.


62
"Copyright law is in place to protect artistic expression, not individual ideas"

"Harney’s creation consists primarily of subject matter — ‘facts’ — that he had no role in creating, including the central element of the photo: the daughter riding piggyback on her father’s shoulders
 Harney’s difficulty in alleging infringement is that almost none of the protectable aspects of [his photo] are replicated in the [Sony image]."



http://www.petapixel.com/2013/01/25/boston-court-rules-no-infringement-in-the-case-of-two-very-similar-photographs/

S.G.


63
The movie looks to be super-creepy.



S.G.


64
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: information to send or not to send
« on: January 28, 2013, 07:00:05 PM »
Just a quick comment here.

Normally, Getty pursues "Rights-Managed" images.
That is, images whose purchase price is dependent upon the physical size, resolution, and where they are used.
Additionally, such images may be used for a pre-determined time limit as set out in the contract.

Even though person "A" may have bought the image in the past, it doesn't mean that person "B" may now use it for his/her purposes without a license.
The contact to use the image(s) has probably expired also.

Therefore, Getty is likely not to accept your explanation.
Your designer wouldn't be responsible, as you've stated that you used the images in error, and not him/her.
Getty usually pursues the "end-user", you see.
In any case, they just want to get paid.

Others will chime in shortly...

S.G.


65
We can call the judge "informed"..!

S.G.

66
Thanks for the update and good news Scraggy!!
There seems to be a trend in the courts wherein these huge legal demands for minor infringements are being called out as excessive.

Scraggy seems to be quite a good Mensch!!

S.G.


67
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Here we go! Got my letter!
« on: January 28, 2013, 12:53:47 PM »
Buddhapi is correct on both points.

However, you should be aware that rules vary from state to state and province to province as to what might be considered to be a successful delivery of legal papers (service).

Generally speaking:

Personal delivery by a "process server" is the gold standard for delivery.
Be aware that it needn't be passed from the server's hand to your hand.
For example, imagine that you were approached in public by a server and he/she asked if you were "John Doe".
You might respond in the affirmative, at which point he/she would hand an envelope to you.
But, even if you did not take the envelope, he/she could simply drop it at your feet, and say "you've been served".

It's sometimes difficult to duck service to a workplace.
If a server can find out where you work, he/she may approach someone in charge, and ask if you work there.
He/she may then give the document to that person to give to you.

In some places, regular mail is an acceptable form of service if the document isn't sent back "return to sender" within a handful of days.

Email is a really crappy way of sending legal documents.
If you receive documents by email (or even Facebook), and you respond at all, an argument may be made that you've read the documents in question.

Some will just shove the envelope in your door, or mailbox.
This can work if they can prove that you do in fact reside there, or if you respond.

In some states, the rules are fairly strict as to what constitutes service.
In some Canadian provinces, all that needs to be proven is that the person read the documents, and/or was aware that they were being sued.

Protip: watch the online court docket for your state and province.
If you've been sued, it'll appear on there.  Expect delivery within the next business day to three weeks.

Evading a lawsuit can actually work, in spite of the impression that process servers prefer to give, which is "you can't hide, and we'll get you every time".
While resources are certainly available to track people down, it's actually very, very expensive to do so.
But, it can be quite stressful, as you'll feel that you're always looking over your shoulder.

Having said all that, lawsuits are very rare, especially in the case of Getty and relatively minor infringements.
Most folks here don't recommend ignoring these issues, and letting things snowball into bigger problems.

A final thought.  Even if you can't work things out at first, it's never too late to negotiate a settlement even if a lawsuit has been filed.
Nobody (even the trolls) want to risk going to court.

S.G.


68
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Entrapment???
« on: January 27, 2013, 11:25:50 PM »
Many companies that provide templates use freelancers or contractors to make their product.
Sometimes, these third parties use images that they haven't paid for.

S.G.


69
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Letter from Masterfile
« on: January 24, 2013, 04:19:13 PM »
Something to keep in mind...
If you're living with a "friend", it will be extremely difficult for anybody to send you anything in an "official" capacity.

You'll likely never get sued; but lets just say that they wanted to file just to scare you.
Just tell your friend not to accept any papers or deliveries on your behalf, and not to confirm to anyone that you reside there.
They'll probably never be able to serve papers on you. lol.  Also, it's not illegal to avoid "service".

I got sued when I was sick and not working.  I was staying with family at the time.
They never properly served me, and they had to give up eventually.

S.G.




70
I should also add that this is a case of "innocent infringement".
That is, while the end-user "infringed", the infringement wasn't intentional, and/or it was committed by a third party (in India).
Courts normally only award $200 in cases like this (if anything).

Perhaps, the company that actually owns the website could offer this amount to MF.
MF probably won't accept it.  But, it IS fair.

S.G.


71
Here's the issue.

You were paid to do a job as an employee or consultant.
Employees/consultants are NOT normally the recipients of these legal demands.
The focus is ALWAYS on either the company that actually owns the site, or the actual development company.

Masterfile has NO actual legal leverage to make you pay.
They'd have to sue the company or the web development company or BOTH.
If your friend's boss wanted to make you pay after MF makes him pay, he'd have to sue you.
This would be quite a difficult case, the costs would vastly eclipse anything that he'd gain, and he would be unlikely to prevail.

But, it's up to you... if you feel responsible, you can make the best deal that you can with MF and pay that.
However, if you don't have any money, what's the point?
I'd suggest Oscar's "letter program", BUT, I don't think that you should take steps that would imply that you are legally responsible.

I really think that this is going to end up in the hands of the company that owns the website.

S.G.


72
Welcome to the forums.
Masterfile should be addressing the business that owns the website.
i.e. your friend's boss, et al.

S.G.


73
If you're Canadian, it would have to be filed in a Canadian court.
Also, Canadian laws would apply.

From what I understand, Canadian law doesn't allow for collection agencies to pursue legal demands for which no court judgement as been made (that is, "non-debts").
So, NCS/Getty broke Canadian law.  At the very least, this would create a legal problem for them if they were to pursue this.

In any case, Getty hasn't sued anybody in Canada in years, let alone for one image.
Personally, I wouldn't get into it with the collection agency unless they really harass you.
It's better to say as little as possible.  But, you may point out to them that what they are doing breaks Canadian laws.
That will promptly end it.

S.G.

74
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Letter from Masterfile
« on: January 22, 2013, 06:05:20 PM »
I don't think that dissolving the LLC is "wrong" necessarily.  That might just fix the problem on the spot.

But, now is a good time to do some homework.
That way, if the LLC needs to be dissolved, it can be done in a way that MF can't "get around".

S.G.


75
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Letter from Masterfile
« on: January 22, 2013, 05:34:46 PM »
Welcome to the forums.

Yes, Lucia's right.  They'd have to pursue the LLC.  So, keep the LLC going for now.

Be advised that Masterfile is really vicious.  So, you'll have to be strong and hang in there.
They'll put a lot of pressure on you, but you can come here for support.

Masterfile hasn't filed many lawsuits lately.
But, they have sued one guy that said that he was retired, and sued another person that was unemployed and actually medically unable to work at the time.
These cases had to do with multiple images.

Be strong.

S.G.



Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 84
Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.