I am a frustrated and sick to my stomach Canadian!! Help!!!!

[testycal]

if in Canada brief summary of copyright law

limitation period is 3 years from date alleged infringement discovered or owner should have discovered
owner can elect statutory or actual damages
must  prove actual damages - ie what a customer would pay to license the image usually what the website pricing shows and I question whether available promotions and discounts that are always shown should be considered
if statutory damages unless infringement is wilful, statutory damages were significantly reduced in 2011 amendments to the copyright act so that a court may award a minimum of I believe of $200 per image where non commercial use made of the image and infringement not  wilful
there is no need to register copyright in Canada to take advantage of statutory remedies like in the US
however, an owner can more easily prove ownership if the image has been registered with the  proper government office here
real issue is firstly if owner can prove ownership and that is done by stock companies usually taking written assignments
this is where some of the stock companies got into trouble as their  assignment agreements were declared invalid by the courts
in order to have standing in a Canadian court to sue the  stock company must have exclusive ownership and their problems arise  where they pick and choose from the bundle of rights of ownership ie stock company says we have copyright and IF we need to sue you the original owner agree to give us the  right to sue on your behalf
the courts had a problem with that here in Canada
see Master File 2002 decision of the Federal Court that declared assignment invalid
Master File in response changed the language of its assignments as I understand

makes for interesting reading as portions of artist agreements are reproduced

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2001/2001fct1416/2001fct1416.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAYbWFzdGVyZmlsZSBhbmQgaW50ZXJuZXR0AAAAAAE
 
I like most feel that the  current system is broken in that the threat of litigation in this  area causes stress and often payment without ensuring the owner is actually entitled as it is confusing and the law is very relevant in that  it requires verification of ownership whether actual or by way of proper assignment and there are damages to be considered and whether  an alleged inf ringer has legal defenses such as fair use which is not  dissimilar to  the US experience.

[meontheweb]

HI - I'm in the same boat as you, I'm Canadian and in the same predicament.  I also rec'd the e-mail as you have below, however I am surprised that they would use e-mail and not registered mail or mail period.  E-mail is not dependable, it can be deleted accidentally, it can go into your SPAM/JUNK folder and there are thousands of emails there and nobody can be expected to go through thousands of e-mails to find the false positives and move them around.

I'm also not sure of what to do.  In my case they offered to reduce the amount by 25%

However do I reply to them via e-mail or by registered mail?

What do I say?

I'm getting sick to my stomach also and just want this all behind me.  I've taken down several for hobby websites and don't use images in any blog posts and avoid using images for any FB/TWITTER posts that I make.

Sick and disgusted...

Ok guys, I promised to keep updating this thread with any progress.  Today I received this email from the NCS Solutions and it made me really sick.  Here is the content of the email:

QUOTE:

"Subject: Getty Images/Neamat Tawadrous #164013

Settlement Offer: $2,650.00

Our office has already attempted to contact you on numerous occasions to resolve our client’s claim of the unauthorized use of their protected imagery.  Please be aware that copyright legislation provides for strict liability, regardless of your level of knowledge or intent.  You have been previously forwarded the website and URL where our client’s image appeared.  As the end user, your company is ultimately responsible to ensure that the appropriate licenses or rights to the image(s) have been obtained.  Please be aware that if you hired a third party web developer to design your website, your company is still responsible to ensure that the images that appears on your website have been licensed.  Additionally, if you have purchased or acquired images from a subscription service or a website that provides templates you are still liable to ensure that the imagery appearing on your website has been purchased.

Kindly advise of your intention within 10 days.  If we do not hear back from you within that time we will have no other choice than to assume that you do not wish to amicably resolve this matter with our office and we will return the file to our client’s legal department for further evaluation and escalation.

Thank you,

NCS IP Solutions
PO Box 50276
Sarasota, FL 34232
 
T(941)371-9900
F(941)371-9901
 
This is an effort to effect a settlement and any information obtained will be used for that purpose."
UNQUOTE

I was advised by an attorney not to get into any arguments or conversations with them or with Getty and he told me they will keep harassing and he advised to ignore it all until they actually sue me in court.

Any advises or suggestions or feed back.  I would love to hear from you and if anyone in Canada have been sued before, how did it go?

Looking forward to hear your input.

Neamat

[meontheweb]

This is GREAT!  Being a Canadian and dealing with these "fine folks" can be intimidating (Canadians are too nice, or so I've read).  Thank you - thank you - thank you.

Though I'm still "scared" about all this (it's so new for me) I realize I can't hide and it will go away... well, only if I wait three years it will go away.  I will of course sit tight, even though they've offered to reduce the amount by 25% - I still don't have $1,000.00 laying around.

if in Canada brief summary of copyright law

limitation period is 3 years from date alleged infringement discovered or owner should have discovered
owner can elect statutory or actual damages
must  prove actual damages - ie what a customer would pay to license the image usually what the website pricing shows and I question whether available promotions and discounts that are always shown should be considered
if statutory damages unless infringement is wilful, statutory damages were significantly reduced in 2011 amendments to the copyright act so that a court may award a minimum of I believe of $200 per image where non commercial use made of the image and infringement not  wilful
there is no need to register copyright in Canada to take advantage of statutory remedies like in the US
however, an owner can more easily prove ownership if the image has been registered with the  proper government office here
real issue is firstly if owner can prove ownership and that is done by stock companies usually taking written assignments
this is where some of the stock companies got into trouble as their  assignment agreements were declared invalid by the courts
in order to have standing in a Canadian court to sue the  stock company must have exclusive ownership and their problems arise  where they pick and choose from the bundle of rights of ownership ie stock company says we have copyright and IF we need to sue you the original owner agree to give us the  right to sue on your behalf
the courts had a problem with that here in Canada
see Master File 2002 decision of the Federal Court that declared assignment invalid
Master File in response changed the language of its assignments as I understand

makes for interesting reading as portions of artist agreements are reproduced

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2001/2001fct1416/2001fct1416.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAYbWFzdGVyZmlsZSBhbmQgaW50ZXJuZXR0AAAAAAE
 
I like most feel that the  current system is broken in that the threat of litigation in this  area causes stress and often payment without ensuring the owner is actually entitled as it is confusing and the law is very relevant in that  it requires verification of ownership whether actual or by way of proper assignment and there are damages to be considered and whether  an alleged inf ringer has legal defenses such as fair use which is not  dissimilar to  the US experience.

[stinger]

I recommend you do NOT correspond with them via email and DO NOT speak to them by phone.  They don't know they have your email address until you respond to them.  If they get you on the phone, they will be trying to learn more about your situation and get you to admit something.

If you feel you must communicate with them, some do, do so only in writing and send things registered.  Admit to nothing.  Require them to prove that they are who they say they are and that they have the legal standing to negotiate.  Not communicating at all might be just as good of a solution.  Only you can decide what works for you.