getty image in free template -- still avaible for download

[steve426]

Got my demand letter on sept 13, yep friday the 13th.  I was designing a website for our small business.  Downloaded a free template and according to getty in image on that template they own the copyright to.  what bothers me is that I download it some time in july  2013 and the template is still availabe as of nov 4 2013.  My question is should I contact the free template website to see if they have proof of a valid license or is this a waste of time.  Seems these site are out there seeding copyright infringement cases for getty.   My image in question was up for only 2 months, their demand $965.00. Website had a basic format and no verbiage yet. 

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Once again we see that FREE isn't free at all, in more ways than one. I'd like to see the site where you got the free template.

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

I would read the fine print on the site.  I have seen from other people here going through the same issue when they look at the fine print it says that there is no guarantee the images may not be copyrighted. 

From what I have seen Getty will go after the end user for $$$ and leave the person/site alone.  IMO this makes money for them so they don't go after the people spreading the "FREE" image.

In my case the image I received a letter for was on an individuals site, he put his name on it the image like it was his along with a title and placed it in a free public directory.  It appeared to be his image, got the letter and told Getty where i got it from and to show proof of claim since I had Getty and this other person claiming the image.  I continued to check the other site and before I stopped checking about 6 months later the image was still there.  I made note of this fact in my complaint letters to the Washington State Attorney General, BBB, FTC, Congressman, Senator etc.

Unless you take the image yourself there are no guarantees on anything, Getty gets sued at least once it seems like for selling images that are not theirs.

[steve426]

The site is yestemplates(dot).com.  The template file contains a word doc call Terms & Conditions.  States  "you are entitled the right to use any of the limited graphics supplied as part of the product for commercial and personal use."  Guess my next question is how do you determine if an image is copyrighted and to whom.  I have only been able to use tineye or google image search.  This only tells me who is using the images and where.  I guess if getty is listed you steer clear of that image.  I would like to finish the site without having anymore issues.  also if I use a image that getty later acquires rights to, am I infringing on their rights of the image. Still need to learn more on how copyrights work.

thanks for replies   
   

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

Copyright exists from the moment the picture is taken whether the image is registered or not so unless the image is so old that it has fallen into public domain or it's a public release government image then someone has rights to it.  Rights may be waived and the image made public.

You letter from Getty should contain the artist name, from there I would use that information and go here http://www.copyright.gov/records/ to look up if it is registered.

If an image is not registered it limits what can be sought in court but you should not really worry about as it is HIGHLY unlikely Getty would waste their time on your case.  Get screen shots of the free site and the TOS page you quoted.  I am not a lawyer but in my opinion if everything you have stated is correct this is a de minimus case with a 200.00 fine.  The federal courts would not be happy if Getty wasted the courts time over a 200.00 case.

[Lettered]

Just a slight correction. 
I think "de minimus" doctrine is used to completely dismiss a matter because it is too trivial to waste their time looking at it and not really directly related to damage amounts.
  The $200 is not a fine, but it is leeway (a lower limit) granted to the judge to award smaller statutory damages in the case of an image that was registered with the copyright office before the infringement began, where it is determined that it was "innocent infringement".  If the image wasn't registered properly before the infringement (and I doubt it was) then statutory damages aren't even a consideration at all.
but I don't think a case like this one would ever make it to court either.

Copyright exists from the moment the picture is taken whether the image is registered or not so unless the image is so old that it has fallen into public domain or it's a public release government image then someone has rights to it.  Rights may be waived and the image made public.

You letter from Getty should contain the artist name, from there I would use that information and go here http://www.copyright.gov/records/ to look up if it is registered.

If an image is not registered it limits what can be sought in court but you should not really worry about as it is HIGHLY unlikely Getty would waste their time on your case.  Get screen shots of the free site and the TOS page you quoted.  I am not a lawyer but in my opinion if everything you have stated is correct this is a de minimus case with a 200.00 fine.  The federal courts would not be happy if Getty wasted the courts time over a 200.00 case.