Well, well, what do we have here? What an interesting find. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. This is a very interesting lawsuit indeed. The description in the lawsuit is worth reading. I have cut and pasted the text from that section and highlighted the interesting parts.
======================
NATURE OF CASE
1. This is a copyright lawsuit brought by distinguished American photographer Carol M. Highsmith under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), 17 U.S.C. §§1202(a), 1202(b) and 1203, based upon the Defendants’ gross misuse of Ms. Highsmith’s photographs – more than 18,000 of them.
2. In December 2015, Ms. Highsmith received a letter addressed to her nonprofit organization from the Defendants accusing her of copyright infringement and demanding payment for displaying one of her own photographs on her own website. See attached Exhibit A.
3. Ms. Highsmith subsequently learned that the Defendants have been sending out similar threat letters to other users of her photography, and that Getty and Alamy are purporting to sell licenses for thousands of her photographs on their commercial websites.
4. Through the United States Library of Congress (“Library”), Ms. Highsmith had previously given the public the right to reproduce and display all the photographs at issue in this lawsuit, for free.
5. Beginning in about 1988 and continuing from time to time, to the present, Ms. Highsmith has been providing the Library with tens of thousands of her valuable photographs.
6. These photographs represent her extensive documentation of people and places throughout the United States of America.
7. The Defendants have apparently misappropriated Ms. Highsmith’s generous gift to the American people. The Defendants are not only unlawfully charging licensing fees to people and organizations who were already authorized to reproduce and display the donated photographs for free, but are falsely and fraudulently holding themselves out as the exclusive copyright owner (or agents thereof), and threatening individuals and companies with copyright infringement lawsuits that the Defendants could not actually lawfully pursue.
8. As described further herein below, the conduct of the Defendants runs afoul of the DMCA’s provisions proscribing the removal, modification and falsification of “copyright management information,” unlawful conduct that has injured Ms. Highsmith, thereby entitling Ms. Highsmith to the relief sought herein.
9. Furthermore, despite the fact that Ms. Highsmith objected to the Defendants’ conduct shortly after receiving the Defendants’ threatening letter, such brazen and extortionate conduct still continues to this day, as the Defendants continue to threaten users of Ms. Highsmith’s photography. Defendants continue to license these images, in exchange for money that they know they are clearly not entitled to collect.
10. Defendants’ violations of 17 U.S.C. § 1202 entitle Ms. Highsmith to recover, among other things, and if she so elects as provided in 17 U.S.C. § 1203(c)(3)(B), “an award of statutory damages for each violation of section 1202 in the sum of not less than $2,500 or more than $25,000.”
11. Getty has committed at least 18,755 separate violations of 17 U.S.C. § 1202, one count for each of the 18,755 Highsmith Photos appearing on Getty’s website. Thus, Ms. Highsmith is entitled to recover, among other things, and if she so elects, aggregate statutory damages against Getty of not less than forty-six million, eight hundred eighty-seven thousand five hundred dollars ($46,887,500) and not more than four hundred sixty-eight million, eight hundred seventy-five thousand dollars ($468,875,000).
12. The unlawful conduct complained of herein is not Getty’s first violation of the DMCA, codified at 17 U.S.C. § 1202.
13. Getty was found by this Court to have violated 17 U.S.C. § 1202 within the last 3 years, and ordered to pay over $1 million in damages.
14. Because Getty has already had a final judgment entered against it by this Court under 17 U.S.C. § 1202 in the past three years, this Court may treble the statutory damages in this case against Getty.
15. Getty must therefore account for well over one billion dollars ($1B) in statutory copyright damages in this case.
16. Unfortunately, the Defendants’ bad faith business practices have proven to be so lucrative, their behavior has apparently continued unabated.
17. Absent Order of this Court and such exemplary damages to deter such egregious conduct, Ms. Highsmith and the public at large will continue to be defrauded, misled, and irreparably injured by the Defendants’ unlawful acts.
Topic: Photographer sues Getty for extortion letters over her work (Read 25247 times)