Messages

1

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile 3rd Communication - What to do?

« on: January 16, 2010, 06:30:55 PM »

I managed to have the infringement fees waived after using images included with a Template Monster template. The images included with my template were from Getty Images. I cannot comment on whether the same thing will work with Masterfile. Getty Images and Template Monster came to some sort of settlement which included those who had purchased certain templates.

Template Monster has had ongoing copyright issues for years. I recommend not purchasing templates from them.

2

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: How to Stop Using Stock Photos & Boycott the Stock Photo Industry

« on: May 24, 2009, 11:37:15 AM »

Thank you for a good article Matthew. I began boycotting stock photography sites after my experience with Getty Images. I take all of my own photography for my blog, websites, and printed materials. I do the same with clipart, drawing my own or acquiring it from openclipart.org. I just wanted to add a few comments about my experience trying to hire "pro" photographers.

I design clothing and I attempted to find a new "pro" photographer. In exchange for a discounted rate, the photographer would get to keep the clothing and have their name and web address plastered all over the photography. I had no problem with them keeping the sample clothing in exchange for a discount rate because I wouldn't have been able to sell it after it had been worn. I didn't like the terms requiring their copyright notice and web address on the photos as I intended to use the photographs on my own e-commerce site. I think it would lead to brand confusion. Who was really selling the clothing? Other recently turned "pro" photographers were demanding the same kind of deal. Perhaps I was looking in the wrong places for photographers, but I found the requests unprofessional for a "work for hire" situation. I have returned to taking my own photographs.

There is a battle forming over the use of photographs and I think everyone will lose if common sense isn't allowed. The same thing is starting up with the recent Fashion Anti-Piracy/Copyright Law (in committee). While this issue is a discussion for another place and time, it will force fashion/apparel designers and retailers to experience the same headaches that creators and consumers are currently facing with photography.

3

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: December 06, 2008, 01:22:26 PM »

If you go to archive.org, you can request to have your site completely removed. They honored my request.

4

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: November 30, 2008, 03:11:05 PM »

I am curious about the lawsuit against archive.org. I blocked the archive.org robot and removed my original site info. Still, is Getty suing for the right to access old site info beyond what is publicly available? That is very bullish! Probably something the archive.org people did not anticipate.

5

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: November 17, 2008, 06:17:35 PM »

The Happy Birthday song is a matter of debate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_birthday_song

6

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Template Monster and Getty - my story

« on: October 26, 2008, 04:14:10 PM »

Oscar, I am wondering if you would like me to send you a copy of my case even though it has been resolved? I am not seeking legal counsel but would like to help others. Keep up the good fight!

7

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: how do i make sure i do not use copyrighted materials?

« on: October 21, 2008, 11:24:54 PM »

While I don't dispute Oscar's advice, there is only one way to ensure you don't use copyrighted material and that is to take pictures yourself. I bought a website template that included pictures that were supposed to be available for my use. Unfortunately, the images were stolen from Getty's image bank and I became the possessor of stolen property.

There is no way to determine if a photograph is available or not. There is no national database or registry that can be easily searched to determine copyright or ownership. Many images have no embedded information or watermark. This is actually a flaw of recent copyright law which allows an assumption of copyright without any disclosure. Perhaps Oscar can explain this further. In any event, failure for conspicuous disclosure can lead to a lot of innocent infringement, IMO.

8

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My Letter Policy

« on: September 01, 2008, 06:09:54 PM »

Thank you for providing this service! Though my case is now closed, I would have been extremely grateful to have had a letter written in my behalf. I did try to obtain the services of an IP lawyer (or any lawyer willing) and none would touch it. I am not sure why - perhaps the grey areas of copyright law and the relatively small claims. In any event, it is awesome to see someone helping the little guy.

9

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Template Monster and Getty - my story

« on: August 06, 2008, 12:19:43 PM »

I received the refund check about one month after the phone conversation and it cleared. This all happened about one year ago.

I don't know that Getty was necessarily double dipping. I think Template Monster and Getty had been in negotiations for quit some time. What is clear is they knew that Template Monster was selling templates with "their" photos. Regardless, they wanted payment from somebody for the use of the photos, whether it was me or Template Monster. They don't really care if you get your picture through a third party as long as they get payment. They will pursue both offending parties until they get their money. So it is possible they were double dipping with other victims and that other Template Monster customers paid Getty in addition with Template Monster's settlement. Any other Template Monster customers who received the Getty letter should ask for a refund on any fees paid.

I got lucky because my formal complaint with my state AG converged about the same time as the agreement between Template Monster and Getty. If I had paid out when I received the first letter I might have been out of luck.

10

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Template Monster and Getty - my story

« on: August 04, 2008, 12:21:23 AM »

Idaho.

The letter Getty received from the Attorney General only notified them that a formal complaint had been made and asked them to negotiate.

11

Getty Images Letter Forum / Invoice/Sent to Collection questions

« on: August 03, 2008, 10:18:16 PM »

I am curious about the tactics that Getty Images is using. Surely, they are exploiting or abusing customer protection laws (except in most cases there aren't customers, but rather users). For instance the demand letter is in the form of an invoice? How can they send an invoice for something when there was never any sale? Further, how can they send someone to collection for copyright issues when there hasn't been any judgment against the "infringer"?

I have followed pro-photography forums/blogs and the Getty procedure is becoming an acceptable form of seeking redress against "infringers". I think this is a way to avoid actual litigation and having to prove actual infringement. Surely there has to be a better way?

It's as though GI has become a judge and jury unto themselves, assigning fines without proof. This has always bothered me because the US copyright law is clear about DMCA take down notices. But perhaps this is a grey area of US copyright law that needs to be more clearly defined. In any event, they aren't even giving webmasters an opportunity to take anything down before assigning fees.

Anyway, just some thoughts on the issue.

12

Getty Images Letter Forum / Template Monster and Getty - my story

« on: August 03, 2008, 10:04:55 PM »

Note: I have previously posted this story in the google group Help for Getty Victims and elsewhere. I have made a few minor edits. My thanks to the forum hosts for providing this space to share my story. I received my refund check from Getty Images and have sort of closed this incident. I have continued to follow other cases and have learned a great deal about copyright and intellectual property laws and I strongly believe that Getty Images is exploiting US copyright law for financial gain. In any event, I have saved all of my Getty paperwork and will happily submit it if there is ever a class-action in the US.

I call this a small victory because I think I just got lucky. Because
of a set of circumstances and my State Attorney General applying some
pressure, I will be receiving a refund on the demand fees I paid. I
will try to explain what happened to me and maybe some of you in
similar situations can find relief.

I purchased a web template from Template Monster. Getty Images
pursued me for use of an image included with the template. I had proof of
purchase, plus copies of the terms of use included with the template.
The image had no notice of copyright and I assumed that template
monster had the right to distribute that image for my use.

Getty Images notified me in January 2007 with the first demand letter,
more than 6 months after being published on the web. The demand was
for $1300. I removed the image from my server immediately and I
contacted Steve Chizmar, copyright officer with TM, informing him of
the situation. He advised me to ask for proof of copyright and to take no
further action. I ignored the first letter.

I received a second demand May 2007. I ignored this letter too. Tried
to seek advice from an IP/Business lawyer. My state has about 5 IP
lawyers and none were willing to look at the case mostly because the demand
was for such a small amount (not small to a business start-up though!).

In August 2007 I was sent to collection. I received a letter and a
phone call from the collection agency within one week of each other.
After telling the agent the invoice was in dispute, she informed me
that I had to pay or Getty would sue me for 10 times the amount of the
invoice (which is illegal if Getty never truly intends to sue). I
decided to pay the invoice and seek financial redress from Template
Monster. I also sent a formal letter of complaint to my State Attorney
General and asked them to negotiate in my behalf with Getty Images.

In September I started my weekly letter writing campaign with Steve
Chizmar at TM asking for financial redress for the fraudulent product
sold to me. Steve Chizmar responded and said that there was an
agreement with Getty and all I had to do was remove the image and not
owe any money.

One week ago I received a phone call from Getty Images. They informed
me that they received my formal complaint from my State Attorney
General. They now have an agreement with Template Monster and will be
refunding me my demand fees. The phone conversation went like this:

GI: We have been pursuing TM for years for outright theft of our
images.

Me: Why, then, have you pursued me for more than 6 months for this
money?

GI: We had no way of knowing how you obtained the image and had to
assume you stole it. Ultimately you are responsible for the use of the
image regardless if you obtained the image from a third-party like
template monster.

Me: Why then did I have to go through the extreme measure of being
sent to collection when I did NOTHING wrong? The image had no notice
of copyright and there was no way for me to know the image belonged to
anyone other than Template Monster.

GI: Someone had to pay for the image. You're right, there would have
been no way for you to know, but someone still has to pay for it
whether it is you or template monster.

Me: That isn't really fair.

GI: Well hopefully we can do better by you next time.

Me: Um. Hello! You don't treat potential customers like criminals and
expect to turn them into paying customers. No. Getty Images has lost a
possible customer as I will never, NEVER, have future dealings with
Getty Images.

I don't think I would be receiving a refund check if I hadn't filed a
formal complaint. My state AG doesn't always mediate unless they feel
it is in the state's best interest. They must of felt this case
warranted it and for that I am grateful. I should received a refund
check in about 2 weeks.

Best of luck to those in similar situations.