61
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
« on: March 23, 2017, 09:03:45 PM »
Looks like the NYPhotographic Facebook page has now disappeared..
| Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program | |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
62
Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Youtube's Content ID
« on: February 02, 2017, 07:38:21 PM »I have a question that I have had a hard time getting an answer to and thought I would try here.
It's in the same realm, albeit with music and video.
Youtube has a system in place to manage copyrighted music and video. If you're not aware, the system identifies copyrighted works, and if it has a deal in place with the publisher/copyright holder, then it will respond by either blocking the video, muting it, or monetizing it with ads. It's up to the publisher to choose which option with most choosing to collect royalties off of advertising.
So here is my question, is the user still on the hook for copyright infringement under this system? For example, if I made a video that used a unlicensed song but was allowed to upload it to google because the publisher agreed to collect royalties. In this scenario, the youtube video would be the only place the video would be viewed from. I could understand that it wouldn't be a blanket authorization, but something seems awfully sketchy about the legal parameters.
Most artists nowadays choose the "place ads on your video" approach.
They see it as a win / win. The Artist makes money, you get to use music in the video.
Unlike these image extortion schemes, YouTube typically flags your video as soon as it goes up and give you options. (eg: remove it, dispute it, etc)
It becomes up to you what you want to do at that point.
Again: Unlike these image extortion schemes you get a chance - in most cases..
With that being said, do you remember the "dancing baby" lawsuit a while back?
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/14/440363919/dancing-baby-wins-copyright-case
Anything is possible...
63
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
« on: December 25, 2016, 03:52:35 PM »Higbee just sent me a collection message via email on Christmas day. Can you believe it? Classless intimidation.
Its probably an automated email.
Don't let it get to you.
Enjoy your Holiday.
64
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
« on: December 20, 2016, 01:09:09 PM »
@chinagirl
Just out of curiosity how much was the amount on the initial demand letter?
Just out of curiosity how much was the amount on the initial demand letter?
65
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
« on: December 18, 2016, 02:12:14 PM »
Additionally, if you are reading this (and have received a letter) and are feeling overwhelmed :
The information contained in some of the threads on this site is golden.
You'll soon find that there are quite a few threads from people just like you that offer helpful suggestions and strategies.
- Understand that you are not alone in this
- Step back to gain perspective
- Then take some time to read through the forums and use the search
The information contained in some of the threads on this site is golden.
You'll soon find that there are quite a few threads from people just like you that offer helpful suggestions and strategies.
66
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
« on: December 18, 2016, 01:45:01 PM »
Interesting how this is unfolding...
Part of me can't help but wonder if the firm(s) representing this individual are even aware that their client is clearly seeding the web.
Part of me can't help but wonder if the firm(s) representing this individual are even aware that their client is clearly seeding the web.
67
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
« on: November 23, 2016, 01:04:23 AM »68
Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
« on: November 21, 2016, 03:51:14 PM »
I have just received one of these letters from the usage of a image by this photographer.
I obtained the image through the creativecommons.org search which led me to a site (different from the ones listed in this thread) which directly links to the photographers site. (it appears to be possibly owned by the photographer as the banners on it and all images / links point to his site)
On the first website, (where the image was obtained from) displayed below the image is : " This image _________ may be used for free even for commercial purposes.
The image _________ below is licensed by it's creator under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and also permits the image to be modified. "
Based upon this understanding I used the image.
Had I've known that purchasing a license was required I would have either (a) looked elsewhere or (b) paid for a license like I have done in the past.
Either way I have collected enough data to get this thing thrown out of court should it end up in litigation.
Pathetic.
I obtained the image through the creativecommons.org search which led me to a site (different from the ones listed in this thread) which directly links to the photographers site. (it appears to be possibly owned by the photographer as the banners on it and all images / links point to his site)
On the first website, (where the image was obtained from) displayed below the image is : " This image _________ may be used for free even for commercial purposes.
The image _________ below is licensed by it's creator under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and also permits the image to be modified. "
Based upon this understanding I used the image.
Had I've known that purchasing a license was required I would have either (a) looked elsewhere or (b) paid for a license like I have done in the past.
Either way I have collected enough data to get this thing thrown out of court should it end up in litigation.
Pathetic.
Official ELI Help Options |
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |