The Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter: Reporting on the Extortion Letter Scheme

The Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter
Information Website

New October Telephone Interview of Attorney Oscar Michelen Posted with Updates!

Home | My Case | Talking Points | VIP Contacts | Getty Clones

Purpose of this Website

This website is being provided as a public service to gather and expose information on The Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter. Clearly, this website is not endorsed or authorized by Getty Images. However, every effort is being made to provide factual information and professional opinions regarding Getty Images' and their "practice" of issuing "Settlement Letters" that I consider "legalized extortion". We will not engage in purposeless and reckless rants and name-calling here.

As Lead Contributors of this website, we believe what they are doing is technically legal but ethically and morally questionable. "The Letter" bullies and preys upon the legal ignorance of the recipients of the Letter. This website attempts to discover and report the facts in an orderly way. This website also provides assistance in defending unaware and unintended victims of this Letter.

There are two sides to every story and disagreement. Recipients of the Letter know Getty Images side. This website will assemble the stories of "the other side". We trust this website will be both helpful and beneficial to you.

Sincerely,

Matthew Chan & Oscar Michelen

Oscar Michelen

What is "The Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter"?

The Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter is a deliberate attempt by Getty Images to deliberately intimidate and bully recipients of the letter to pay an extravagant "settlement fee" in exchange for Getty Images agreement to NOT sue the recipient. Recipients of this letter have allegedly infringed on the alleged copyrights owned by Getty Images.

This is a copy of the Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter I received.

Pages 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

What the Letter Tells the Recipient

It informs the recipient that they have allegedly infringed on the copyright(s) of Getty Images.
It provides a greyscale photocopy of the original image and a screen capture of alleged misuse of the image.
It asks the recipient to provide proof of a valid license for use of this image such as a sales order or invoice.
If no proof exists or can be provided, the recipient is asked to "cease and desist" use of the image. (However, where it gets sticky on this part is that the letter makes a strong point that ceasing use of the image does not eliminate the so-called "liability" for the fees due. This issue will be discussed elsewhere on this website)
And finally, the letter states that if the recipient wishes to continue using the image, to contact their License Compliance team.

How the Letter is Organized

There are 4 major sections of this mailing:

The Introductory letter which provides an overview of the purpose of the communication, the importance of the matter, and the actions Getty Images wants the recipient to take. (See Page 1 and Page 2)
A Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section of common questions and arguments. (See Page 3)
A page which provides the alleged contact information for the infringing website and a greyscale photocopy of the original image with its catalog number and a screen capture of the allegedly offending web page. (See Page 4)
The Settlement Demand itself which has ignited this controversy. The Settlement Demand looks similar to an invoice and contains what nearly every recipient considers to be an outrageous dollar amount for Getty Images to "settle this case". (See Page 5 and Page 6)

Why is This Being Called "Legalized Extortion" and an "Extortion Letter Scheme"?

This is a descriptive term for Getty Images' deliberate, malicious, bullying, and presumptuous letter campaign that engages in what is tantamount to legalized extortion. The letter in its entirety is both well-worded and well-constructed. It has been clearly been well thought out. Because of the deliberate construction and planning that goes into this letter campaign, it qualifes as a Scheme.

The Letter automatically presumes guilt of the recipient. The letter recipient is expected to provide proof of their innocence. In effect, the letter recipient is presumed guilty unless they prove their innocence.

Although the letter does provide for the possibility that the letter recipient was unaware and unintended of the alleged infringement, the Letter takes a heavy-handed and unforgiving approach of stating that they are responsible for all alleged "damages and liability". The Letter automatically presumes Getty Images has been "damaged" whether or not that is actually true or proven.

Because this scheme relies heavily on the letter recipients ignorance of due legal process and people's inherent fear of legal conflict as a result of that ignorance, it is considered by many as legal extortion.

Given the overall assessment of the situation, the term "legalized extortion" was coined to better describe Getty Images very aggressive letter campaign.

The Attack of the Clones

It appears that MasterFile have gotten into the action. We have received our first reader submission of the MasterFile Settlement Demand Letter. Believe it or not, MasterFile appears to be even more heavier-handed than Getty Images.

Please visit the newly-created Getty Clones section for the latest information.

Who is the Editor of this Website?

My name is Matthew Chan. I am an independent publisher and business author that was unwillingly drawn into this fiasco. As someone who respects copyrights and adamantly opposed to copyright infringements, I have no problems with someone defending their copyrights. However, there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to handle things.

I will admit that this has been embarassing to me professionally. But I am not going to hide it. I am supposed to know copyrights well and prevent such infringements from occurring. However, my sense of justice is stronger than my sense of professional embarassment as is evidenced by the creation of this website.

Upon receiving my copy of the Getty Images Settlement Letter in June 2008 with a "settlement fee" of $1,300, I quickly researched this phenomena on the Google and Yahoo search engines. It quickly became apparent to me that there are many victims like myself who fell victim to the countless unscrupulous web banner, template, and graphic designers from India (and other similar countries that habitually and deliberately disregard and violate copyrights) that profit by stealing licensed images and incorporating them into their "creations" (web templates, web banners, and web graphics) and reselling them to their customers in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., and Australia.

Initially fearful of the Letter, I became angry about how I was being treated with very little consideration. I understand the concept that "ignorance is no excuse". However, in practical terms, intent always matters and people and businesses must co-exist civilly with one another in this world and you must pick and choose your battles. There is a difference between people who infringe intentionally and those who do not.

Do people truly want to make enemies with other people who might also be part of the customer base? It appears Getty Images answer is "yes" and they don't care. They have made an enemy out of me. I will certainly lose time and money over this website but I won't take this lying down and be expected to pay for other people's criminal actions (the Indian web banner, template, and graphic designers.) Common sense must prevail here.

I am not looking for a fight with Getty Images but I will aggressively defend myself. They made the threats, not me. If I am threatened, I aggressively defend and, more importantly, retaliate. I am not going to sit idly by while someone continues to threaten me. I am the "David" and Getty Images is the "Goliath". I am the underdog in this fight but I can be very creative. I am not going to simply rant and rave irrationally. I am going to collect the facts and conduct myself in an intelligent, civil manner.

I invite you to assist me, Oscar Michelen (my attorney friend and business associate), this website, and our common defense by sending in your story and your information to me. Let us come together and share information for this common cause so that we are not bullied by Getty Images.

Attention Website Owners, Bloggers, and Discussion Forum Administrators!

If you would like to help the cause, send me any helpful, informative, and meaningful web links, articles, blog posts, and discussion threads regarding Getty Images Settlement Letters, I will post them on this website and share it. If you choose to remain anonymous, we will respect your wishes.

Conversely, if you feel you want to help spread the word, drop me an email and let me know what you want to copy and paste to your websites. If you have a legitimate website, blog, or discussion forum (no porn, scams, drugs, or other weird stuff), I am going to encourage you to disseminate the content I am compiling.

Help me disseminate good information. To maintain credibility, no rants and ravings, only intelligent and thoughtful discussions, thoughts, ideas, and commentary please!

Send email to:

Attorney Oscar Michelen Is "Official Moderator" and "Subject Matter Expert" for ELI Discussion Forum and ELI Website

Attorney Oscar Michelen is the "official moderator" and "subject matter expert" for the ELI Discussion Forum and this website. Like myself, Oscar agrees there needs to be an established platform on the Internet to separate the facts from speculation regarding the whole Getty Images Settlement Letter controversy.

The ELI Discussion Forum allows Oscar to freely express his thoughts and opinions of the Getty Images Settlement Letter controversy while simultaneously answering questions. There is no better resource on the Internet than having access to a respected attorney like Oscar.

Attorney Oscar Michelen Announces Letter & Representation Policy

Dear Readers:

Let me explain what I have been doing and why. I am a seasoned litigator in NYC and was brought into this issue by the founder of this website, who was a publisher that received a Getty Images Letter. He had been handling it on his own until he sought legal counsel. After I answered his question and agreed to send a letter on his behalf, he surmised that many, many others must be in the same position. So he decided to put up a website to address some of the issues. After receiving thousands of hits almost immediately, and hearing people's similar complaints about Getty, we decided to offer something to help out those who are caught in this current dilemma.

My Fee Policy

I agreed to write a letter for any company that received a demand letter from Getty or their collection agency for the total fee of $150.00 US. I also decided that I would include a second letter at no extra cost should Getty respond to the first. Now, I have to tell you that I regularly charge $450.00 per hour for my services in litigation matters. I am routinely retained at that rate by clients on litigation issues. As a result, I now represent many companies at various stages of the Getty Issue. My first letter went out six weeks ago and to date, Getty has not responded. The letter is not a boilerplate form letter. While it does contain some stock language (don't worry I wrote it myself so I own the copyright) it is specifially geared to how the client got the image and used the image.

While Getty has not filed a single lawsuit over this issue, I have also told my clients that I would reduce my hourly rate to $150.00 per hour should Getty sue them and should they decide to retain me as their litigation counsel. I make it clear that they are under no obligation to retain me as litigation counsel and they can terminate my services at any time. Paying the $150.00 for the letter(s) does not obligate them in any way to pay any further fees to my firm.

So that is my firm's fee policy on the Getty Issue.

Why am I Doing This?

I am doing this because I see it as the only way to level the playing field a little bit. I believe Getty chose the $1,000.00 per image demand because tht number is high enough to make it enormously profitable to Getty yet low enough that folks who took one or two images would be hard pressed to find competent counsel who could defend the claim. (And as you can see from other posts of mine and others and from my web conversation posted on this site there are defenses). This letter now assures clients that they will not be contacted directly by Getty again and that the fictitious deadline set by Getty has been satisfied. Yes, I gain some "web presence" by doing this and have been introduced to many wonderful and successful entrepreneurs through this issue, but that is just a small bonus compared to the satisfaction of helping out someone needlessly put into distress.

I can't tell you how great it feels to hear small business owners sighing in relief when they see the letter (a draft of the letter is sent to each client for approval before it is sent to Getty) and know that this is being handled and they can get back to focusing on what they want to focus on. In addition to my practice, I am a law professor at New York Law School which is on the cutting edge of intellectual property and patent law. I teach the first year legal writing and appellate advocacy classes there. I regularly tell my students to be proud to be lawyers as law and the courts are often the only place that individuals and small companies can get a fair shot. And I remind them that it can't always be about the fee, sometimes it has to be about "doing the right thing." So I am also putting my money where my mouth is as well.

My Take on Getty

I want to conclude by saying that I am no fan of copyright infringement. More often, I am on the side of the small company or startup that puts out content only to have a larger company or rival take its idea and profit off of it. What I am against is hard pressure tactics designed to scare someone into paying a claim and also masquerading a claim as a debt that is in collection.

Were I Getty's counsel, I would have recommended a cease and desist letter and then brought a claim only if the party persisted in the use, unless I had proof of an intentional infringement. I believe this issue may tarnish Getty's reputation in the end. The company has been for sale for some time now and this may also be a way to show a revenue stream for prospective buyers as less and less people are paying for these types of images. Who knows why they are taking this approach? I only know that it subjects innocent people to undue stress and concern. I hope that my efforts and this website's efforts help to alleviate that stress somewhat.

Oscar Michelen

Oscar Michelen in Court
Oscar Michelen Taking Charge of a High-Profile Case in New York

Attorney Oscar Michelen Shares October 2008 Updates in Phone Interview

On July 25, 2008, New York Attorney Oscar Michelen agreed to a 1-hour interview to discuss Getty Images, the infamous Letter, and issues/distinctions that ever Letter Recipient needs to know. For the very first anywhere on the Internet, we are providing original audio content with Oscar's professional and legal opinion.

On October 14, 2008, Oscar provides an update of the latest developments, insights, and strategies relating to the Getty Images Demand Letter controversy.

Do not assume what you know or what Getty Images says is correct until you have listened to this insightful phone interview. Do not take advice from amateur advice-givers who do not know copyright law, it's application in a court of law, or have never set foot in a courtroom.

You can listen to this informative July 2008 interview here. Because of the length of this phone interview, it is being provided here in 2-parts.

Oscar Michelen Phone Jul-2008 Interview - Part 1 (28-minute MP3 file)
Oscar Michelen Phone Jul-2008 Interview - Part 2 (25-minute MP3 file)

You can listen to the updated October 14, 2008 interview here. Because of the length of this phone interview, it is being provided here in 2-parts.

Oscar Michelen Phone Oct-2008 Interview - Part 1 (24-minute MP3 file)
Oscar Michelen Phone Oct-2008 Interview - Part 2 (15-minute MP3 file)