Pixsy demand email

[mac14]

Hi Matthew, thanks for your reply but I'm not after 'certainty' or 'guarantees'. I'm just looking for some honest advice about how to deal with Pixsy's threats from people who may have been through something similar. 

I appreciate not all situations are the same but if someone has successfully ignored these demand letters or had legal action taken against them because they did, then at least I have some insight to make a more informed decision.

No doubt many ELI users have far greater knowledge than myself about the legal aspects of copyright laws so I'm simply asking for advice on how to tackle this situation.

I've already negotiated them down from £450 to £360 and they're adamant that's the lowest they can go.

[Matthew Chan]

Generally speaking, many people have had success "ignoring" letters if they chose to. But that is not "advice". It is a choice that many people successfully make.

There all kinds of "advice" on this forum which I won't repeat. In my view, there is nothing special about Pixsy that is different with almost anything that has been covered many times prior with other companies.

[mint11]

I appreciate not all situations are the same but if someone has successfully ignored these demand letters or had legal action taken against them because they did, then at least I have some insight to make a more informed decision.

Hi mac14,

I am going through a similar situation with Pixsy at the moment: threats have come in - I have taken the image down but now they are threatening legal action if I do not pay up. I have not responded to any communication so far

I'm willing to contribute for the image use but do not feel they are asking a fair price.

Can I ask if you have had any updates/progress on this since last month? And also how you went about negotiating the price?

[PoeNedge]

I appreciate not all situations are the same but if someone has successfully ignored these demand letters or had legal action taken against them because they did, then at least I have some insight to make a more informed decision.

Hi mac14,

I am going through a similar situation with Pixsy at the moment: threats have come in - I have taken the image down but now they are threatening legal action if I do not pay up. I have not responded to any communication so far

I'm willing to contribute for the image use but do not feel they are asking a fair price.

Can I ask if you have had any updates/progress on this since last month? And also how you went about negotiating the price?

Hi, any updates on this? I've got an extortion letter from them and they want $750, their saying it's commercial use but I say it's editorial use as I wasn't making money. This photo was taken down along time ago and there's no clear evidence that the photo was ever used, I didn't write the blog someone else did so I'm not even sure if they used the image. What to do?

Thanks

[erika1959]

Hi,

You wanted to know how what happened with Pixsy pursuing me. I took the advice I got on this forum and refused to respond to the emails or answer their calls. I last heard from them a couple of months ago, saying they were about to "escalate" and that they were withdrawing their "offer". I haven't heard anything since, but am not breathing easy just yet.

HTH

[PoeNedge]

If you haven't heard from them in 2 months then that tells me they have no leg to stand on for further escalation.

So from what I've read, Pixsy can do nothing but threaten you. They are not a law firm. Furthermore, if the author did not register their work before the infringement (or 3 months after it was first published), they cannot claim statutory damages or lawyer fees in court. The most they can do is get the value of the work, which isn't even worth the filing fees or cost of hiring a lawyer for them.

In my case they set about 3 deadlines for me to pay and I haven't, if they wanted to file a lawsuit they would have by now. I've told them that the amount they're asking for this photo is too much, as I can find one on shutterstock for $15. Their response is that this is the authors rate for licensing his photo. This is bullshit because Pixsy takes 50% of that fee, so the authors rate is half of that. Also the author doesn't actually sell his work anywhere, so there is no basis for what he charges. Why charge $700 when he could charge $10,000 or $100,000?

[UnfairlyTargeted]

Personally I think $15 is generous.  Based on buying 5 or more images the price on the site you mention is less than $10/image, and did you know the photographer only gets a small fraction of that, like $1 or $2?  So the s*itty photographer has really only lost a dollar or two.  If you want to offer something, offer them a dollar or two, but then send them the check by mail and deduct the postage from the amount they receive.

[Zeke]

I want to thank everybody in this forum that has encouraged the best way to deal with claims of copyright infringement is to "get educated". After running websites for 15 years, I received my very first claim of copyright infringement and it was from Pixsy. I initially panicked but then Google searched and found places like this. After three days of reading about copyright laws, I've finally convinced myself that many of the facts and claims made by Pixsy were misleading, incorrect, and in some cases I would consider fraudulent.

One thing I did learn was that if your website hosts a forum, blog, etc and the copyright infringement claim is against content uploaded by another user...you may be protected by "safe-harbor" provisions in the DMCA as an online service providers. This does require you to be proactive and register as a designated agent for takedown notices with the U.S. Copyright office for a small fee. You'll also have to ensure that you provide the same contact information on your website. And that's exactly what I did. I found this article to be very helpful: http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/protecting-yourself-against-copyright-claims-based-user-content

So, my response to Pixsy's email was quite simple. I notified them that I removed the image they claimed was being infringed; I told Pixsy I communicated to the user the image was removed; and I also told Pixsy that I notified the user that he/she may counter-file a notice against Pixsy's claim.  I suspect Pixsy will send more threatening letters my way but at least there is now an electronic record that I took all actions required by copyright law which should protect me from liability of the claims made by Pixsy. My response was no more than three sentences and I gave them only what was required by law.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

You will get more letters.. If you registered the DMCA agent after the fact, it's to late, can't remember the case at the moment, but it was ruled on in a believe the 9th Circuit.

[Zeke]

You will get more letters.. If you registered the DMCA agent after the fact, it's to late, can't remember the case at the moment, but it was ruled on in a believe the 9th Circuit.

You're absolutely right, I received my second letter.   

Yes, a DMCA agent is under more obligations and just registering alone to protect themselves from the action of the user. In my particular case though, I have a lot more of the law behind me to protect me against the claims, misleading evidence, and solutions being offered by Pixsy. The evidence and unauthorized use report Pixsy filed to my site contains so many errors and false claims that I'm not even certain they know which image they're claiming is being infringed. No matter what the image in question is, every single artwork he registered under his name with the U.S. Copyright office (via several group registration) was more than a year after creation and at least 6 months after the user of this image published their the image.

Here is my question, the "solution" being offered by Pixsy is a solution that in itself offers a license in direct conflict with the original license. The two licenses aren't compatible and I doubt the license being offered by Pixsy is even legally binding. Given that much of the document is misleading and the solution likely isn't even legal, why isn't Pixsy working on behalf of their client not held liable themselves for making false accusations. Has anyone attempted to make these "resolution services" accountable for their actions?

[Ethan Seven]

I am not sure what you mean by make them accountable for their actions.   The actions you describe sound like incompetency which manifests itself in the inability to draft or present licenses.   However, their duty to do that is owed to their clients, not you.   If they were intentionallly misrepresenting facts to you in effort to extract money from you, there may be a cause of action under state law.   Seeing that you were smart enough not to pay them, my guess is that your chances of recovering damages are reduced. 

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

You will get more letters.. If you registered the DMCA agent after the fact, it's to late, can't remember the case at the moment, but it was ruled on in a believe the 9th Circuit.

You're absolutely right, I received my second letter.   

Yes, a DMCA agent is under more obligations and just registering alone to protect themselves from the action of the user. In my particular case though, I have a lot more of the law behind me to protect me against the claims, misleading evidence, and solutions being offered by Pixsy. The evidence and unauthorized use report Pixsy filed to my site contains so many errors and false claims that I'm not even certain they know which image they're claiming is being infringed. No matter what the image in question is, every single artwork he registered under his name with the U.S. Copyright office (via several group registration) was more than a year after creation and at least 6 months after the user of this image published their the image.

Here is my question, the "solution" being offered by Pixsy is a solution that in itself offers a license in direct conflict with the original license. The two licenses aren't compatible and I doubt the license being offered by Pixsy is even legally binding. Given that much of the document is misleading and the solution likely isn't even legal, why isn't Pixsy working on behalf of their client not held liable themselves for making false accusations. Has anyone attempted to make these "resolution services" accountable for their actions?

One option you have is to start filing complaints and encourage others who feel same as you to do the same. IThey won't change overnight and you have to be in it for the long haul but if it continues it can put pressure on them to change the way they operate.

[Zeke]

Yes, this is where I'm going with this. I definitely understand the need for the copyright owners and those working on their behalf to do what's in their best interest. But the tactics I argue that these "resolutions services" are using indeed includes misrepresenting facts. In the long run I believe the approach they are using is not in the best interest of their clients (they need a better business model too). I just can't believe these are legal tactics they're using to get compensation for their clients. I've known loan sharks (really) that were more honest in their approach than the initial documents sent my way.

My conversation via email with Pixsy has been brief so far since the initial email and the questions they are asking are reasonable for someone representing the copyright holder. I've made certain my answers are accurate, brief, and polite. Basically, I'm following the law of my responsibilities as the website owner. We'll see how this goes.

However, their duty to do that is owed to their clients, not you. If they were intentionallly misrepresenting facts to you in effort to extract money from you, there may be a cause of action under state law.

[Zeke]

I received an email from Pixsy that they discontinued their case against me! It's quite possible that Pixsy is playing some sort of "long game" here and will come back at me with this claim again or even a new claim. However, I'm hopeful this is the end. My case would be an example that shows you're better off responding to the claim and acting in good faith. No matter who you are dealing with, don't let the threats of a bad actor control the actions you need to take when a claim of copyright infringement is made against you.

The only actions I took were those required by law when a DMCA takedown notice is given. I wrote no more than a total of 10 sentences stretched across three emails. I made no mention in my emails of the claims I knew were false nor of the "solutions" Pixsy was offering because it's all irrelevant in a formal takedown process. My replies were a reflection that I "educated myself", knew the copyright holder's responsibilities, and knew my responsibilities. I think the rep from Pixsy knew (because I knew) the right thing to do legally and for their client was to move on and be satisfied that I promptly removed the image the user had uploaded to the website.

[Matthew Chan]

Congratulations on having your case resolved.  My comments inline.

It's quite possible that Pixsy is playing some sort of "long game" here and will come back at me with this claim again or even a new claim. However, I'm hopeful this is the end.

That is paranoid thinking. There is no advantage for them to lie to you in this manner. If it is dropped and they told you, be happy and move on. It is almost as if you are asking for the to revive whatever case they had against you.

 My case would be an example that shows you're better off responding to the claim and acting in good faith. No matter who you are dealing with, don't let the threats of a bad actor control the actions you need to take when a claim of copyright infringement is made against you.

I generally tell people to respond and make strong arguments if there are facts that help your position. People who want to stay silent generally let the other side assume the worst. I have found that most victims have a very difficult time understanding this basic concept. They can't understand the concept of discussion, debate, and standing by your position to defuse the situation  vs. trying to beg and "convince" the other side to drop the case. Most of the time, people don't announce they will drop the case. They just quietly go away.  Nearly everyone wants the matter to be black and white which is almost never the case and leads to people foolishly settling when sometimes they don't need to.

The only actions I took were those required by law when a DMCA takedown notice is given. I wrote no more than a total of 10 sentences stretched across three emails. I made no mention in my emails of the claims I knew were false nor of the "solutions" Pixsy was offering because it's all irrelevant in a formal takedown process. My replies were a reflection that I "educated myself", knew the copyright holder's responsibilities, and knew my responsibilities. I think the rep from Pixsy knew (because I knew) the right thing to do legally and for their client was to move on and be satisfied that I promptly removed the image the user had uploaded to the website.

I would agree with your statement. Getting smart and giving informed responses go a long way to defusing any potential claims. They may never publicly admit it.  But having a good informed, educated, and firm response often goes a long way to "lessening" any claim and impetus to pursue certain parties.

I have seen so many people do absolutely dumb things like copy template letters from the Internet and send them in.  It does nothing except show the sender of that letter how lazy and uninformed they are. They think the recipients of the letter will sudden by stopped in their tracks by a widespread template latter.