Our friends at Techdirt has written about Getty Images' License Compliance Services latest extortion antics on behalf of Trunk Archive. The target is 2600 Magazine who have chosen to fight back and report the matter to Techdirt. More power to them for exposing the extortion letter they received!
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150908/18123432199/getty-images-tries-to-copyright-troll-2600-magazine-over-content-it-has-no-copyright-over.shtml
Special thanks to ELI Team Member, Robert K. (also of copyright-trolls.com) for emailing this to my attention.
Please note the final paragraph in the Techdirt article.
So that's twice this week that we're seeing Getty Images act not just like a typical copyright troll, but one that is so drunk with shakedown power that it's not even bothering to understand just what the fuck it's doing. But, of course, the company can get away with this kind of stuff because (1) there's no punishment for abusing the law in this manner and (2) many sites will probably just pay up rather than deal with the legal threats. It's legalized extortion, and Getty is profiting from it at the expense of actual creators. In yesterday's post, Getty gave some bullshit answer about protecting the rights of the artist. What's its excuse going to be this time?
This is something ELI has been preaching since 2008! It is always glad to see someone else independently corroborate what we have long known and reported.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150908/18123432199/getty-images-tries-to-copyright-troll-2600-magazine-over-content-it-has-no-copyright-over.shtml
Special thanks to ELI Team Member, Robert K. (also of copyright-trolls.com) for emailing this to my attention.
Please note the final paragraph in the Techdirt article.
So that's twice this week that we're seeing Getty Images act not just like a typical copyright troll, but one that is so drunk with shakedown power that it's not even bothering to understand just what the fuck it's doing. But, of course, the company can get away with this kind of stuff because (1) there's no punishment for abusing the law in this manner and (2) many sites will probably just pay up rather than deal with the legal threats. It's legalized extortion, and Getty is profiting from it at the expense of actual creators. In yesterday's post, Getty gave some bullshit answer about protecting the rights of the artist. What's its excuse going to be this time?
This is something ELI has been preaching since 2008! It is always glad to see someone else independently corroborate what we have long known and reported.