Messages

31

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My Very Own DeBoer IP Extortion Letter from John M. DoBoer

« on: April 15, 2015, 11:25:57 AM »

My only other suggestion is for you to NOT chase them. Don't be so desperate to get a response. Their only response will be "pay us." So you need to play the long game until the three year statute of limitations is up.

And seriously, their petty claim is not worth loosing sleep over. You've identified other places the image is available. "Web Shots" images have very murky usage guidelines. A third party built your web site. They are not going to sue you. They are going to send you irritating letters every few months. But there is no way in hell this is worth it to sue.

32

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile v. Law Firm of Jerry Joseph Settled

« on: March 20, 2015, 03:23:06 AM »

You know what I find interesting? Two of the more publicized wins against "infringers" came at the hands of attorneys. In fact the last attorney that simply chose to settle with Getty was one Oscar even reached out to and offered to help. This settlement, which is way higher than usual, also comes from a law practice.

One theory could be that MasterFile and Getty pushed extra hard on these cases because attorneys should know better.

But I have another theory. (And I must emphasize that this is sheerly cynical speculation on my part.) What if Getty or MF offers them some inducements to settle? They use quite a few attorneys. What if there were some sort of offer of work in exchange for a settlement. That wouldn't technically be illegal (I don't think). So an attorney agrees to  settle for an extraordinary high amount, but in exchange, they get to do the next patent filing. Meanwhile the image company can point to a concrete example of what others have settled for. Also, it looks less like abuse of the threat to sue, if they actually do settle once in a while.

Like I said, this is PURELY speculation on my part. But I do find it odd that the biggest settlements were at the hands of lawyers agreeing to settle.

33

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Jonathan Klein Steps Down as Getty CEO

« on: March 15, 2015, 04:08:01 PM »

I am on record years ago for saying "suing your potential customers is not a sustainable business model." Burning through a third of Getty's cash in a year seems to enforce that prediction. I try not to partake in Schadenfreude http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude. But in Getty's case, I am overjoyed to make an exception.

34

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: What you can learn from my 3 year battle with Getty and McCormack IP Law

« on: February 17, 2015, 11:09:58 PM »

Congrats Joe,

I know that even though you were more than prepared should they decide to pursue you, it is a relief not to have to dedicate mental bandwidth to dealing with them. Even though you are out of the woods, I hope you continue to post here.

I imagine we will be hearing from quite a few more people who have reached the end of their 3-year statute of limitations in the near future.

35

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Extortion letter/s from August Images

« on: February 05, 2015, 03:09:35 AM »

You will obviously have to do what is right for you. If it were me, I would insist this thumbnail image on a non-commercial portfolio site that was used to show a photoshop technique falls under fair use. They will obviously disagree. I would notify them it is at their discretion to pursue this as a federal case, but starting immediately you will be billing them for time it takes to address any further questions.

That's just me.

36

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Unauthorized Use of Science Photo Library Ltd Image(s)

« on: December 13, 2014, 06:08:34 PM »

They have no copyright on this image. Unless they made transformative alterations to the underlying work, the image is not theirs to claim.

Based on what you said so far, my reply would be simple:

 The image is in the public domain. Not realizing this at the time, you purchased a license from their affiliated company, iStock photo for a few dollars. If they pester you again with further requests for documentation, they must provide a chain of title showing how they have the exclusive rights to this image. If they do continue to ask for further clarification you will provide it. However you charge $200 an hour for this service and bill in half hour increments. You will submit an invoice for any further time they cause you to spend on this issue.

Done.

37

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Lucia's Statute of Limitations Reached

« on: December 06, 2014, 12:45:05 AM »

Awesome Lucia!
Congrats!

38

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Sanders Infringement Letter

« on: December 03, 2014, 11:27:34 AM »

The one driving impetus towards me pursuing this any further would if my particular case (hotlinked image) could help cause them some trouble with their status as a law firm.  By mostly if by doing so I could help others in the future by setting any sort of precedent.

Great! With a hot-linked image, you are on solid footing. So your efforts to jam up the trolls would be very helpful. In fact doing as Robert suggests would be a great step.

If I were in your shoes and the image was indeed hotlinked, I would not so politely tell Craig Sanders to go fuck off, unless he can prove that the image was hosted on your servers ( which he can't) I would follow that up with something along these lines: "For every subsequent letter that is sent your way, you will invoice Sanders Law for any time needed to respond. send it certified mail with reciept, so you can then invoice them,once you confirm they got the message.. I would also consider setting up a registered agent, if you allow others to upload anything to your site. Sanders law is quickly becoming the new douche-bag copyright troll, right up there with that dick-head Timothy McCormack from Seattle.

Now, Robert's language can get pretty salty, so you might want to desalinate the actual verbiage before you send your letter. But you are on solid footing to tell them to fuck off and that you will begin tracking your time and billing for it if they continue to harass you.

39

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Free Images of the Week from Masterfile

« on: November 24, 2014, 11:36:00 AM »

My read on this is they are saying you are free to use this image as if you had paid for the licensing. But, yeah, I tend to not trust ANY of the companies that participate in the Copyright Extortion Letter Program. Until Masterfile and Getty Images change their method of copyright enforcement to something more sane and reasonable, I will continue to suggest that my clients, collaborators, and even vendors use another stock image company.

40

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Need an opinion on a letter I received.

« on: November 23, 2014, 04:34:33 PM »

JLorimer and Lucia I hope you know I wasn't talking about you two. I am specifically thinking about all the people that posted here three years or more ago, freaking out. They got the advice they needed and vanished, never to return.

41

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Ownership

« on: November 22, 2014, 03:17:24 PM »

Can Masterfile *and* the original image author BOTH claim copyright of an image (with watermark)?

I'm confused by this statement. Did you post an image on your site that had a watermark? Did you remove the watermark? Were there two watermarks?

42

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Need an opinion on a letter I received.

« on: November 22, 2014, 03:14:56 PM »

One thing I have noticed from reading this thread and others over the past few months is that many of the people who were actively sharing updates don't give a conclusion or stop responding.

That's because most people are too lazy or too self-centered to return to share this information. Sorry, but it is becoming increasingly clear that beyond the couple dozen people that are consistently active on this thread, few even return after their three year statute of limitations are up to say they made it without further action.

Fortunately several people like Matt, Greg, Stinger and Lucia keep an eye on court filings and report when there is any actual cases filed. So we can assume the vast majority of extortion letter victims that posted on this board three years ago either decided to pay up or they went silently into the night without further incident.

Maybe after reading this it will encourage others to follow up down the road and "pay it forward" by sharing their results.

43

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Blog Post Extortion Letter

« on: November 01, 2014, 03:56:18 PM »

I'm with Greg on this.  If your attorney friend is a good friend, I would ask that future correspondence be directed to him. I would also make it clear that you expect any further contact to contain proof that they are the sole party authorized to represent the image and whether or not they have the copyright registered.

Furthermore, I would mention that investigating their claim will cost you time and money. Should it be determined that they have made this claim in error, you will seek reimbursement for your time and expenses. I also wouldn't bother making the letter too friendly, just professional.

Please do post back your results.

44

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My case could not be solved, even after trying Oscar Defensive Letter Program

« on: October 15, 2014, 11:45:39 AM »

At this stage, Oscar cannot publicly comment on this. But here is a lay person's opinion:

If the images were not really large and not featured on the home page, $4000 is high. It the images accompanied a blog post and were not major design elements or used for marketing, $4000 is high. If you can find dozens of similar images from iStock or Pond5 for $5 or $10, $4000 is high.

That said, if they DO pull the trigger on filing a suit, defending against it will probably cost more than $4000. And the judgement may also be higher.

If it were me, I would research each image they claim to represent. I would find out if that image is available elsewhere. I would find out what that image costs to license from Getty. I would see if the image has been registered with the copyright office. I would find out what similar images cost from micro-stock companies. Once I have all of that data, I would figure out what I consider fair price. I would round up, because of using the image without a prior license. Ultimately I'm guessing my number would be closer to $2000. Whatever that number is, I would present it to Oscar and share how I arrived at that number.

From there I would instruct him to present this amount to Getty Images as my offer. If he had additional information I would heed his advice. But I would also be prepared to represent myself (pro se) in court and present the research I had as evidence. I would also be sure to tell Oscar that if Getty DOES pull the trigger on any suit, I look forward to inspecting the sales history for the images and deposing the Getty CEO.

If this task seems really daunting and highly risky to you, it is probably best that you just pay the $4000.

45

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: what are my options?

« on: October 12, 2014, 02:51:16 PM »

Oh, this is an email? Wait for them to send you a legitimate business letter via mail first.