graphic from another site

[rapidbi]

Hi all
what a great site
I have had a letter from a debt collection firm about a graphic that was on my site
It was on a "links" page, and a 3rd party had used part of a (potentially) getty image as their logo. I did not host the image, but it was seen on our site.

It seems that the image MAY be a getty one or a photos.com image that is very similar. The screen shot was from 2 years ago and the graphic & who posted it are not know to me, and the screen shot is low res so I cannot read the text next to the image, & its difficult to confirm which version of the image it is.

As I did not host the image & said on the page that we were not liable for external links - what is our position?

should we pay up?

Thanks

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

if the image in question was not on your servers, than there is no infringement and they have no case..plain and simple...linking to an image is just that a link and not a "copy"

[rapidbi]

That was my belief, but they are still chasing, I did not see any standard response to this "infraction" any thoughts on how to respond.. to them, I have already stated this

[Mulligan]

Pay nothing. To get them off your back, send a certified letter to the collection agency telling them you have incurred no debt with Getty Images, and that if they contact you again demanding payment you'll report them for harassment.

[lucia]

rapidi--
I saw a "pounds" rather than $ sign on another thread. In the US linking is not copying. If you are in the uk... I don't know.

[Dynazzy]

I recommend you do not respond at all. Like any "debt" collections agency, as soon as you acknowledge receipt of the letter you will be harassed by mail for eternity.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I recommend you do not respond at all. Like any "debt" collections agency, as soon as you acknowledge receipt of the letter you will be harassed by mail for eternity.

That would greatly depend on "how" you respond..in the states collection agency's are regulated..a simple letter stating it is a claim and not a debt will stop them from harassing you..if not it would be very easy to file a complaint.

[Couch_Potato]

The problem in this instance is Atradius are not licensed to chase a debt and they stated they were pursuing copyright infringement on behalf of Getty.

I maintain they have no right to do this because only the copyright holder or exclusive licensee can pursue copyright infringement but I suppose that would only really apply in a court of law.

That's what people need to realise. This is not a legal claim and is operating outside of the courts so any legal threat is purely to scare you. Treat it like you would with any claim operating outside of the legal arena.

I'd definitely tell Atradius to go f**k themselves.