We now have a Twitter Account! Visit and follow http://twitter.com/ExtortionLetter!
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 and other related programs. 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 we 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 letter recipients. This website attempts to discover, report, and comment on the facts in a civil and 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 and legal arguments of "the other side". We trust this website will be both helpful and beneficial to you.
Sincerely,
Matthew Chan & 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.
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 (Getty) Clones
It appears that MasterFile have gotten into the action. We have received our first reader submission of the MasterFile Settlement Demand Letter.
Recently acquired by Getty Images, Jupiter Images has gotten in on the action. We have our first Jupiter Images Settlement Demand Letter for you to read.
It has been brought to our attention that George P. Riddick III of Imageline Inc. engages in extortion demand letters directed towards the Embroidery community. We have received disturbing information and documentation of Mr. Riddick's unprofessional practices.
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.
Because of my unpleasant experience with Getty Images and exposure to the many complaints received by extortion letter recipients,I have personally taken a position to boycott the stock photo Industry. You can read my online article "How to Stop Using Stock Photos & Boycott the Stock Photo Industry"
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.
Matthew S. Chan
Show Your Support: A PayPal Donation
The extensive time and hard work put into this website has been entirely voluntary. The information I have diligently researched, gathered, and openly shared is to assist the ever-growing community of Getty Extortion Letter recipients. To date, this website continues to be a free service I have personally funded.
ExtortionLetterInfo.com has become the definitive informational website in the U.S. to combat Getty's extortionistic letter practices.
At the suggestion of one our enthusiastic supporters, I have set up a PayPal Donation Button for those of you who wish to show your support by contributing and assisting our ongoing cause to fight the Getty Images Extortion Letters.
Help our cause by supporting the ongoing work and updates to this website by making a donation.
I recommend a small donation of $10.00 to $15.00 if you have found useful and valuable information that assisted you in defending yourself against Getty Images. You may donate as little as $1.00 or as high as $100.00. You may donate as frequently or as infrequently as your prefer. But just realize this is an ongoing fight. I need ongoing community support to continue the work on this website.
Thank you for your continued enthusiasm and support in our cause.
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. This is our platform on the Internet to separate the facts from speculation regarding the whole Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter controversy.
The ELI Discussion Forumallows Oscar to freely express his thoughts and opinions of the Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter controversy while simultaneously answering questions. There is no better resource on the Internet than having access to a respected attorney like Oscar.
Meet Oscar Michelen. Learn more about his background, education, and experience.
(40-minutes)
Attorney Oscar Michelen's Getty Images Letter & Representation Policy
(Last updated: 5/1/2009)
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 Matthew Chan, the founder of this website, who was an independent publisher that received a Getty Images Demand Letter. He had been handling his case on his own publicizing his efforts through this website until he sought legal counsel and advice. He had surmised that many others must be in the same position and created this website to address some of the issues. After receiving thousands of hits almost immediately, and hearing people's similar complaints about Getty, I 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 of the letter program, I now represent over 100 companies at various stages of the Getty Issue. My first letter went out in July 2008 and we still get one or two new requests each day. 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 specifically geared to how the client got the image and used the image.
Getty has filed a few lawsuits over this issue, mostly against companies that are accused of infringing on more than twenty images, so 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 that 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 conversations 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. 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
You can contact Oscar at his email address:omichelen@sbmlegal.com. Or you can call to make an appointment for a free consultation at his Toll-free #: 800-640-2000. If you are outside of the U.S., call 212-517-3200.
(Editor Comment: Please be prepared. Have your documentation ready to FAX and the facts of your case ready. Be concise and respectful when you communicate with Oscar. During the consultation, please do not be long-winded and wear him out. He is being very gracious with the discounted legal fee he is charging. Be courteous with his time and not abuse this program. We do not need a few bad apples to ruin this program for everyone else.)
Sandback & Michelen
Two Penn Plaza
New York, NY 10021
Sandback & Michelen
200 Old Country Road
Mineola, NY 11501-4242
Subscriber Only Content
New August 20, 2009 Informational Videos Posted!
Host Matthew Chan and Attorney Oscar Michelen explain the Defense Letter Program, its origin, effectiveness, and how clients use it as a defense and counterargument against the Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter campaign. (43-minutes)
Host Matthew Chan & Attorney Oscar Michelen discuss strategies of how you can defend yourself against Getty Images if you choose to represent yourself without an attorney.(19-minutes)
Host Matthew Chan & Attorney Oscar Michelen discuss the basics of copyright law. (28-minutes)
Only ELI eNews Subscribers have access to this continuous video file. All others must view our truncated YouTube video files.
March 2009 Telephone Interview - "What is Involved to File a Lawsuit"
Since this website was launched, many people have been concerned with "being sued". And yet, most people don't really know what that really means. Most don't understand what is involved regarding the time, costs, issues, challenges, or the process of a lawsuit.
In this informative telephone interview, Matthew Chan interviews Oscar Michelen to describe and discuss what it truly means (and doesn't mean) if someone threatens to file suit on you. Threatening to file a lawsuit vs. successfully filing, serving, preparing, winning, and collecting on a lawsuit are very different things. Do yourself a favor and get educated in this latest free public service audio.
Only ELI eNews Subscribers have access to this audio file.
Attorney Oscar Michelen Shares March 2009 Updates in Telephone 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.
On March 20, 2009, Oscar provides his 3rd update of the latest developments of the Getty Images Deman 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)
Only ELI eNews Subscribers have access to these audio files.
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)
Only ELI eNews Subscribers have access to these audio files.
Listen to the third update from the March 20, 2009 interview here. Because of the length of this phone interview, it is being provided here in 2-parts.
Oscar Michelen Phone Mar-2009 Interview - Part 1 (17-minute MP3 file)
Oscar Michelen Phone Mar-2009 Interview - Part 2 (15-minute MP3 file)
Only ELI eNews Subscribers have access to these audio files.
