Looking for more info on actual and expected results from defense letter program

[Mote]

Hello,

Thanks for providing this resource.  Can you please fill me in on some details of attorney Michelen's defense letter program?  I do not mean to waste anyone's time rehashing information which is already reasonably easy to find, but I have read the pages about the program and a lot of other content here, searched the forum, and watched the 5 part video series on youtube and I'm still unclear on important details about the program.  I can't find much information about what the results are.

I understand that using the program stops Getty and associates from contacting the client.  But, for how long?  It's not clear to me what the ultimate goal and expected outcome of the program are.

I'll ask these questions in a general way, not in the context of a specific Getty letter, because I think this information is important for anyone considering the letter program and it would therefore be useful to get general responses that discuss the range of possible results.

1) I realize this may vary depending on the circumstances of the case, but what are ultimate goals / expected outcomes of using the program?  For example:

   * Bargain Getty down to accepting a lower settlement amount?  How much lower (e.g. %)?
   
   * Get Getty to dismiss their claim?
   
   * Get Getty to go away (essentially give up, but without saying so)?
   
   * Exhaust the 3 year period without a suit?
   

I see that the program includes the first letter and "a second letter at no extra cost should Getty respond to the first".

2) What generally happens after the first letter is sent?  Do they generally respond?  From attorney Michelen's comments in the videos, it sounds like they respond at least some of the time.  Although, the videos I watched are now nearing 3 years old.  Perhaps things have changed since then.

3) How much, if any, of a deterrent effect do attorney Michelen's letters have?  Is it common for Getty to give up on a target once they use the defense letter program, and pursue softer targets instead?  How often / under what kind of circumstances do they give up and go away as a result of the letter program?  Never / once in a blue moon / sometimes / often?


I've seen people recommend using this service for the purpose of preventing Getty and associates from harassing the Getty letter recipient for the next 3 years.  Ok, so the program includes up to 2 letters for the fee and obliges Getty to communicate with attorney Michelen instead of the client....

4) What happens after the 2 letters?  Does Getty continue to pester attorney Michelen for the next 3 years, and if so, what happens?  How far does the $195 fee for the letter program go?  If it covers 2 letters, what happens next?  I understand that attorney Michelen is already offering this service at a steep discount to normal fees, so I'm wondering how much back and forth with Getty he would engage in for that fee, how much back and forth they may try to engage him in, and what that would mean for the client financially.  If the fee only covers 2 letters and if Getty will continue to pester attorney Michelen for the next 3 years, how much can that end up costing to have him deal with them?

I've seen a couple of posts by buddhapi, to the effect of (paraphrasing) "hire Oscar, then they will have to harass him and it will go away", but in both cases he mentions the 3 year period and I'm not clear on what happens between the initial letter from attorney Michelen and the end of the 3 years.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/2-clients-with-getty-letters/msg6349#msg6349

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/think-this-letter-will-stop-their-harassment/msg6591/#msg6591


5) Is there a big advantage to having attorney Michelen's letter be the first response, as opposed to responding yourself and later using the defense letter service?


I'm sure many would really hate to reward Getty's tactics and behavior by paying them an outrageous amount they demand, but as others have said on this forum there's a concern that you may end up worse off by incurring an additional expense (like the letter program) and ending up having to pay them anyway.  If the expected result is that you'll have to pay them anyway, will it yield enough of a reduction in their demand, beyond what you could get them to agree to yourself, to make it a net gain to pay for the letter program?

From what I've read here it sounds like Matthew Chan and Oscar Michelen favor quite a bit of transparency in these operations, and I was wondering if there are any statistics offered on the outcome of cases of defense letter clients?  E.g. how many settle / are sued / never pay Getty anything and exhaust the 3 year period / average settlement amount (as a percentage of what Getty originally demanded), etc.  I could be wrong, but I'm thinking perhaps that kind of aggregate information does not run afoul of attorney-client privilege, though it would take work to compile / maintain and publish, I know.  I don't know how much confidentiality agreements related to settlements might interfere with that.

Thanks!

[stinger]

All good questions Mote.  I, too, hope to see the answers.

I'd like to add another breakdown to the questions.  When I reviewed the letter program a few months back, it appeared that it was focused on those accused of mis-using one or two photos.  Can we break down those statistics into what happens based on how much money Getty is demanding or how many images they are talking about?

[Matthew Chan]

We aren't going to provide all the details of how the Defense Letter Program (DLP) works and the intricacies for everyone to see. That is confidential between me, Oscar, and his office. We have good reasons for this. Nor are we going to provide statistics or outcomes of the cases. Given that, many of your questions will stay unanswered. Sorry.

If you need that much information to spend $195 for the legal service, then I say keep your money and start hitting the ELI resources and online forums and do lots of homework as I did.

What I will say is this:

1. You get legal representation for a very reasonable price from a lawyer that is well-known in his niche. However, there are limits to how that representation will go.

2. Oscar is very good at what he does but you aren't going to get a lot of phone time. That is not what the DLP it was designed for. People who need phone time can pay for an ELI Phone Support Call.

3. I endorse what he does. I helped develop the DLP and we jointly implemented the program into the ELI infrastructure. I am actively involved with most major changes to the DLP.

4. The DLP works cooperatively with ELI initiatives.

5.  The goal is to help the client achieve what he/she wants. If differs from client to client. We don't publicly discuss specific strategies used to help the clients.

6. We do not hard-sell the program or engage in fear-mongering. It is a soft-sell resource and not mandatory. It is made available for those who want to take advantage of it. WE don't try to "convince" people. Our track record and reputations speak for itself.

7. There have been almost no complaints about it out of the hundreds of clients Oscar has represented. That says a lot. If someone wanted to trash us, the DLP, or Oscar Michelen, it could be easily found on Google.

(The few complaints have related to when Oscar was handling all the administrative and clerical aspects and he got backed up while being in court. But part of this occurred also because of people keep trying to get free time from him by clogging up his email account. These issues has since been corrected. I work with his Office Manager on this. She takes care of many of the clerical aspects which allows Oscar to focus on the case, client, and representation as it should be.)

7. I am a big believer of learning how to self-represent but most people don't have the time, inclination, or personality to do so. Hence, people appreciate that we have the DLP available at a reasonable price.

8. We are transparent for the most part. But I will tell you there are "secrets" and things that never get published or discussed publicly because the stock photo agencies, their employees, and their lawyers are reading ELI. It is stupid to reveal all our tactics, strategies, mindset, and everything we know to the public. It is our competitive edge.

9. There is a certain amount of trust you need to have in us. I am biased, but I think the work Oscar and I do is high quality and high credibility. Our business reputations are very good. We aren't going to put out crap just to earn $195.  I don't get commissions from the letters. Oscar doesn't need his reputation tarnished on the Internet over $195 letters when he charges $400-$500/hour in New York.

10. If you are a micro-manager and need tedious updates and details, don't enroll in the program. The program works best without micro-management. You will and can ask for periodic updates but if you try to micro-manage this, it won't be good for anyone.

I know this doesn't answer all your questions. But it is for good reasons. However, hopefully the statements I made will help clarify whether the DLP is suitable for you and anyone else that have similar questions.

[bernicem77]

After spending a couple of hours reading many of the posts on this forum I hired Oscar. Let me tell you, a weight was immediately lifted off my shoulders. $195 was a bargain, if you ask me. You can always hire a local lawyer, but what are the chances that their credentials will match Oscars?

[Matthew Chan]

That is why we don't feel we need to do a hard-sell. If after all the videos, the posts, his partnership with me and ELI website, and dealing with hundreds of extortion letters for the last 4 years doesn't establish the credibility of the DLP, not much will.

For $200, it is a service of convenience for many small business owners.

You can always hire a local lawyer, but what are the chances that their credentials will match Oscars?

[lucia]

I didn't sign up for the letter program, but even so, I think I know the answer  (or non-answers) to some of your questions. 

1) I realize this may vary depending on the circumstances of the case, but what are ultimate goals / expected outcomes of using the program?

Yep. The answer is defenitely "it depends".  After all, each claim is a bit different-- so the goals of the letter program are different. Consider two possible extremes:
1) someone is actually running a "free wallpaper site" and got a letter because you had a HUGE number of getty image listed.
2) someone hotlinked a tiny blurry 600 pixel image deep in comments at a blog.

In case (1) the letter recipient is guilty, guilty, guilty and it could be appropriate to get getty to bargain down to a lower demand. In case 2, the letter recipient has done nothing, and the goal should be to shield the letter recipient from communicating with Getty and ultimately prevent them from filing a suit within the 3 year window. (Getty would be nuts to file a suit in case 2-- so the main goal is to spare the letter recipient from writing their own letters, fielding calls etc.)

So, appropriate goals by a lawyer would be different in the two cases and you question cannot be answered by stating 1 sole goal.

4).....but in both cases he mentions the 3 year period and I'm not clear on what happens between the initial letter from attorney Michelen and the end of the 3 years.

3 years is a statute of limitations for civil copyright claims.  If they haven't sued you within 3 years of first discovering the issue, they are barred from trying to sue (or collect).

From attorney Michelen's comments in the videos, it sounds like they respond at least some of the time.

If you write a response yourself, Getty always responds. I have no doubt that if Oscar writes they a) are less likely to respond but they b)sometimes responds.  If Oscar's program charged for the 2nd letter, I suspect Getty would tend to respond to the first letter.  But as it stands, they know that an attorney has been hired, and so know that they'd better send a higher quality letter than they would to someone writing their own letter. ( After all, when they respond to me, I don't know enough to spot anything that might be used against them in court should this ever proceed. But Oscar would know.)

3) 

How much, if any, of a deterrent effect do attorney Michelen's letters have?  Is it common for Getty to give up on a target once they use the defense letter program, and pursue softer targets instead?  How often / under what kind of circumstances do they give up and go away as a result of the letter program?  Never / once in a blue moon / sometimes / often?

Don't know. Oscar would have to let someone put all his results in some sort of database were we coded with no personally identifiable information so I could run statistics for him. (EG: enter some sort of case code with a)date of letter b) number of images involved, c) hotlinked or self-hosted, d) business/ personal/not-for profit, e) domain controlled by letter recipient (yes/no) , f) hired company to make site (yes/no)

And so on.

As I don't work for him, providing me the information to let me do this  would likely violate the ethics of his field. I'm sure Oscar isn't going to devote an afternoon anticipating which statistics he wants to run, designing the data base to permit those statistcs would be done, entering the data and thendoing the statistics himself.

For what it's worth-- if Oscar wanted to hire me to come up with statistics, I would do it for him. But he'd have to figure out how to hire me and structure the task so privacy was maintained, and he'd have to pay me. But I doubt  Oscar wants to raise the fees of the letter writing program in order to pay the cost of having someone create a database so that we can provide statistics.  Though I would take the job if it was offered I wouldn't advise him to pay anyone (not even me) to do it!

5) Is there a big advantage to having attorney Michelen's letter be the first response, as opposed to responding yourself and later using the defense letter service?

That depends on the specific of your case, the value of your time and your own personality. I am dealing with my case myself because I didn't commit an infraction at all and I am comfortable writing my own letters and dealing with the responses from Getty. (I actually enjoyed writing the most recent one! And posting their response!)  But some people here (ENVL for example) found letters very distressing, and having Oscar deal with it gave great peace of mind.

ENVL would have benefited greatly from finding Oscar initially and having him write the letter. This is partly a personality issue. Me? My personality is different and my situation is different.

In my opinion: if your case is complicated and you are-- to some extent-- guilty of any sort of violation that could result in an award that is several multiples of the letter writing fee, then you probably should get a lawyer who specializes in copyright.
The reason is that in the case of culpability, you want great care to be taken during the letter writing process that reveals only what must be revealed. You also want someone who how to present your case to a judge in a light that is most favorable to you and so on.  So, if your case looks bad-- e.g. multiple infractions, posted on a business site, there is a good chance Getty will want to go to court. Hiring a lawyer early will let you have a lawyer who has continuous familiarity with your case, help reduce the potential for a large judgement against you, help negotiate lower fees to getty. Would you incur legal costs beyond $195 to write the letters in this case? Of  course. That would happen because your case would be one that appears to be potentially much more costly.

In this case, quite likely, the letter writing program would benefit you. But only you can judge for sure.

[bruceh7463]

For $200 the BS from Getty stops.  No more contact.  After a while you will hear from Oscar and then you can decide what to do. Worth every penny.

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

Also worth noting that in the couple of years I have been here, I have never, ever heard anyone complain about what they got for there $195. As Matt mentions there was some clerical hold ups early on and some people didn't get immediate returned telephone calls or emails. (Hello, it's a defense LETTER, not a bottomless pit of free consultation.) But I've never heard a peep from someone disappointed with the outcome of the defense letter.

There was one person on here 6 or 8 months back that was certain that Matt and Oscar were "in on it" and were lining their own pockets at the expense of others. The interesting thing about this character is that I don't think they even hired, or even contacted Oscar. It was weird, almost like they were here to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. And then they just stopped posting.

Oscar and Matt point time and time to the information on this site. Everyone has it within their power to craft a letter based on what is on here. That's what I did. But you assume the risks and you have to consider what happens if you say the wrong thing. Also, by now I think all the parties involved in the extortion racket demand letter program are familiar with Oscar's name. I'd hazard a guess that once they get a letter from his office, a fair percentage slink back into the shadows.

[Matthew Chan]

As luck would have it, Attorney Oscar Michelen authorized me to upload and share one of his Defense Letters against Conrad-Scherer who represents Hawaiian Art Network.  This is going to be another bad day for Glen Carner who coincidentally took the day off from the ELI Forums.

Oscar loves showing me his latest work because I appreciate the art of what he does. I think our audience is sophisticated enough to appreciate it also.

Personally, I think this is pretty darn good value for $250 (HAN Defense Letters are more expensive than Getty Defense Letters because of the smaller volume of letters.)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/96088792/Oscar-Michelen-Responds-to-Conrad-Scherer-Demand-Letter-HAN

Don't you think Oscar deserves kudos for publicly sharing this?  I do. I didn't ask for it. He just volunteered it.  Mighty nice of him since I wouldn't ask on something like this.

[Mulligan]

Great reading. Thanks Oscar for sharing this letter and Matt thanks for posting it.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Truly a work of art! I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Conrad & Scherer read this! I wonder if they even know about the HAN / APS case that is pending..
Thanks Oscar!

[lucia]

It's interesting to see how Aloha's filing the counter claim of seeding has a benefit to Oscar's client at this stage.

[Matthew Chan]

I personally think it's genius.  It sends a strong message the Oscar is more than just a "form letter" lawyer and that he is paying attention (with ELI Community help, of course.)

I would like to say that very few lawyers can say they have an intelligent, proactive, and aggressive volunteer online community on their side.

As I said, Glen Carner is going to have a bad day when he finds out about this turn of events.

It's interesting to see how Aloha's filing the counter claim of seeding has a benefit to Oscar's client at this stage.

[SoylentGreen]

Great documents..!
Any extortion letter recipient reading these will certainly feel a great deal of vindication.
It lays it all out so plainly.

S.G.

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

Dude, that is an awesome letter. Good job Oscar! I especially like the part where you seek to pin down the whole claim of seeding.

"Demand is hereby made that your client or that your firm on their behalf affirmatively state that the image involved in this case was not intentionally seeded onto "free wallpaper" or "free image" web sites as part of the scam described in the counterclaim..."

Classic!

No more dancing around. Directly: Did you or the photographer ever seed or provide these images to free wallpaper sites?

Dancing days are over.