Messages

91

Getty Images Letter Forum / A win for the little guy

« on: February 20, 2014, 11:58:23 AM »

I think visitors to this forum will be interested in this item:

http://www.king5.com/news/get-jesse/Small-Seattle-company-battles-large-firm-over-photos-245913071.html

A small travel agency in Washington, Tropical Travel, had written permission from some of the  resorts they represent to use images that were apparently licensed from Getty for marketing purposes.  It seems Getty sent their typical "demand letter" and threatened legal action. The travel agency tried to explain that the images HAD been licensed for promotional purposes, but, shockingly, Getty wasn't interested in hearing about it.

Instead of simply rolling over and cutting a check, the travel agency turned to local news media. Once the news media began to report on the situation, Getty quickly reversed their position and left the travel agency alone.

I hope this stands as an example that it IS possible to fight back. I would encourage anyone faced with a similar situation to take the same path. I also hope some of the people that visit this site will comment on, and share, the story.

92

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Files 3 New Lawsuits over Single Images

« on: February 02, 2014, 09:12:10 PM »

I haven't pulled down the suits, but are these single images extraordinary unique? Or are they very similar to those available for $1-5 on pond5 or dreamstime?

93

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got My Letter

« on: February 02, 2014, 02:42:58 AM »

Greg, that is a great idea. We should do it. What's a good tag? (I know there will be a lot of "colorful" suggestions.)

Robert: The journey of a thousand examples start with the first hashtag.

94

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got My Letter

« on: February 01, 2014, 08:13:21 PM »

See this type of claim from them makes no sense. If you license an image in conjunction with a product, you should be able to continue to use it to promote that product.

I work in television and we use quite a bit of Getty Images. (For now. Trust me, I'm working on changing that.) But if this is Getty's policy, it makes it impossible to use their photography. When we license an image for a show, say it is going to be on a fake billboard, if a frame from the show contains that shot with the billboard, Getty can sue anybody using it. We cannot use that shot in a press kit, or in marketing materials. Heck, the production company cannot even sell the show to an ancillary market (like a DVD distributor or syndication) without them re-licensing the image.

If this is truly their policy, I need to take it up with the networks' legal department. Bruce, please keep me informed of what happens in your specific case. I guess you'll just take their advice and let it lie. But if you are contacted again, please reply to this thread and/or personal message me.

95

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Just ignore them

« on: February 01, 2014, 07:44:55 PM »

Yeah I was thinking the same thing Robert.

Interesting. Is there a way to look up a lawyer's win/loss record? Be interesting to see his "stats".

96

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got My Letter

« on: February 01, 2014, 03:35:17 PM »

Bruce11, Please continue to share your experience with your supplier. Ask them to consider purchasing their stock images from a more reputable company. Getty Images (which also owns iStockPhoto) has a history of making these type of mistakes. If the image was licensed for use as part of the marketing material for a product, then you should be able to display it in promoting said product.

These mistakes are so frequent I have begun to tag them with a #GettyFlubs hashtag. If you search it you will find dozens of threads.

They also hire second-rate collection attorneys that focus more on squeezing out a settlement then on listening to the issue and properly representing Getty Images. The only way their behavior is going to change is if people stop buying from them.

97

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: ELI Founder Matthew Chan Returns to ELI After Year-Long Exile

« on: February 01, 2014, 03:25:42 PM »

Matthew's Back. Woot!!

It's great to see you back on your board Matt. We missed you. I'm sure Seatle lawyer Timothy McCormack of McCormack lntellectual Property Law is glad he pulled you back onto these boards. 

The way I see it is he is accusing you of copyright infringement for retouched parody images that are NOT currently on your site, in posts that were not created by you but rather other users, and hosted on completely different servers? Is that correct?

Wow. What a copyright expert.

Anyway, Thank you Tim McCormack for doing something that everyone on ELI wanted to see happen for a long time.

Welcome back, Matthew Chan.

98

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: It has now been over 3 years since my Initial letter and still getting threats.

« on: January 30, 2014, 12:06:13 PM »

I agree with Robert. You can easily file a complaint online at:
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov

It seems your category would be "other" and you'd have to specify that ncsip solutions is harassing you for an issue in which you offered a reasonable settlement, it was refused and now the statute has expired. (Probably worth it to mention that based on your research Getty Images has a history of this behavior.) I think I will also tag this thread as #GettyFlubs for future research.

99

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty filed a lawsuit against me

« on: January 22, 2014, 03:01:33 PM »

Fair enough. Thank you for your clear reply.

100

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty filed a lawsuit against me

« on: January 22, 2014, 12:45:43 AM »

Hi Terry,

Welcome to the forums. May I ask if you are a letter recipient? As a relatively new member I'm curious what your interest in this situation is. We usually see new members exploring solutions to their own problems prior to offering suggestions to other, so I'm just wondering.

I think getting advice and opinion on a strategy would be very helpful for rlocke. I also think posting what GI has sent would in no way violate an attorney/client privilege. GI has lurked around for years by encouraging people to keep things quite. So maybe I am a little suspicious of a first-time poster suggesting otherwise.

Also, I'm just throwing this out there, but there may be another avenue some of the members of this site might be able to help the original poster behind the scenes. I'm sure if the O.P. contacts Greg or Robert they can help with that.

In any case, I would check with your attorney, Oscar, and see what he recommends.

101

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty filed a lawsuit against me

« on: January 20, 2014, 04:27:06 PM »

I knew it was only a matter of time until Getty filed on someone represented by Oscar. (They wouldn't want it to be seen as an easy solution.) Seems to me step one would be to contact Oscar's office. Have you done that?

Also, how is it that Getty filed a lawsuit against you and you were not notified? Are you SURE this a a LAWSUIT? Or is this one of those bogus McCormack letters with a "case number" and made to look like a lawsuit?

102

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Do you handle "Attorney Extortion Letters" with you Defense Letter Program?

« on: January 08, 2014, 11:52:33 AM »

I would add that the odds of a smaller image company actually taking legal action are probably higher than Getty Images doing the same. That is because GI has come to realize that most trolling cases that go to court end up, at best, being a financial loss for them and at worst set some precedent that actually makes it harder for them to keep on trollin'. It's easier for them to just chase after the fish that will just jump into their net.

The smaller firms are less likely to understand this and more likely to encourage going to court. We've seen this with HAN and a few other smaller stock companies.

If I were in your position I'd use Oscar's Letter Program to reply.

103

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Today I Received my "Letter"

« on: December 05, 2013, 11:48:47 AM »

It probably goes without saying , scrollgirl, but you should screenshot the heck out of that page for your records. Also, if they come at you again I suggest you firmly state that the original copyright holder granted permission for the use of the image and any further contact on this issue resulting in you having to further document this for them will result in an invoice for your time.

I really think that if people start invoicing Getty for their time, and then pestering them with phone calls to speak to accounting and letting them know that your terms are 30 days from receipt, Getty will be much less aggressive and willy-nilly about who they go after.

If the copyright holder grants permission to use the image and a third-party causes you to waste time proving you didn't "infringe" on their stock image, you have the right to bill for your time while you 'splain it to them. An invoice for an hour and a half at $100 an hour is a great way to flip the script.

104

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Complaint from BWP Media USA

« on: November 26, 2013, 01:42:50 PM »

I know it is after-the-fact, but I would encourage you to file as a DMCA agent:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/dmca-righthaven-loophole/

105

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: "it was an honest mistake" says Getty Images

« on: November 25, 2013, 11:46:54 AM »

The people on this board that are accused of infringement typically only display the images on their site. In this case, Getty Images actually took a photographer's work and sold it to many other outlets. What they did is more like printing up pirated DVDs and selling them as their own. It's nowhere near mistakenly posting an image on a web site. I hope Getty does appeal and the next award is even more than 1.2 million.