Invoiced from Getty Images for Unlawful Use of Images?

[andrewbrott]

The image was found doing a Google search. I had no indication that it was copyrighted and it was placed on my website on a little visited webpage. Not sure what I'm going to do as a next move. Mainly wanted to let this thread know Getty's opinion on all of our thoughts here and elsewhere and their overall bad business ethics and lack of compassion.

[fulleffect]

Getty's making too much money to give a shit.

In fact, i wouldn't be surprised if they make more money out of scaring people with court, than they actually make from selling the photos off their website.


A simple cease and desist would suffice.

[andrewbrott]

I agree. A simple order to stop using the image would be better business practices. But they apparently do make more $$$ with their current tactics. Another case of an unethical company in the US.

[Jean-Luc]

Originally Posted by andrewbrott

The image was found doing a Google search. I had no indication that it was copyrighted

We all know that an image or any other work is protected except if the owner of the image allows you to use it. Nobody needs to say "I want to protect my work" to get it protected.

That said, this is no excuse for the owner of the image to ask millions for a minor infringement.

Jean-Luc

[andrewbrott]

Actually at the time I did this error, I was a newbie and did not know that. However, you are correct, they don't have to have anything stating this. I guess common sense doesn't apply to larger companies. I still think that unless we as a group come up with an idea to communicate our displeasure to companies like these this thread and others like it will be totally ineffective. And Getty knows this. it's a great way to complain but that's it. I had one idea I posted earlier. Anyone have any other ideas? I am waiting to hear back from NCS Recovery, as I also stated earlier, to see what is going to happen. I will let you know

[liferev]

Greetings all, just a further update on my situation. It has been more than a year now and all letters from Getty have stopped. For anyone out there in the same situation, take the advice of this forum and don't sweat it... If you ignore them, Getty will go away.

Cheers guys,

Dan
(liferev)

[baxterco]

I have exchanged a few e-mails with getty at this point. As of my last email I told getty that there seems to be an issue with ownership to a prospective image (that I am not even sure is the image)
And that if they wanted to pursue the issue further to contact the Individual that claims ownership of the image. It has been a week since that email... we'll see what happens, I hope liferev is correct.
I gotta tell ya, that at first getty was asking for $1400 for the image in question, and on their own have brought it down to $1000....
I am prepaid to go to court over it... it is the principle of the matter.
And I will never do business with getty because of this tactic.

[liferev]

Don't stress too much baxterco - just tell them you've removed the images and tell them to leave you alone. They have no legal right to come after you if you have removed them.

Think of it more as a coercive (and unethical) sales tactic rather than a legal situation. They will give up in time if you don't respond further.

Dan
(liferev)

[Doc]

An interesting topic. It caused me to go back and double check a couple of images that I had grabbed via Google, and ensure that they were available for use, and was relieved to see that I'm okay in that regard. Getty's tactic is pretty much the same as many fly-by-night company often uses: Make outrageous claims, with thinly veiled threats, and play the odds. Only around 20% of people will question a statement made with an air of authority, and of those that will do so, 80% will cave in at the first sign of resistance. That equates to 4% paying the claim, on average. With very little effort on their part, and the exorbitant amounts they're charging, it's paying off fairly well for them. But eventually, they'll go too far, and a little publicity on the issue will give birth to a class action suit. From what I see here and elsewhere, I suspect they would lose, and lose big. Meanwhile, the damage they're doing to webmasters and mom & pop businesses is impossible to estimate. Karma can be a beautiful thing, though.

[bpm-uk]

I had a letter today
I did call the number but it went to a recorded service. This is before I found forums like this, who have experienced the getty letter.
I know they should have issued a cease and desist letter but they havent and I have one invoicing me for over 2k for 2 images on my website which I had no idea they were unauthorised.
Please advise me what to do next, shall I email them an apology stating the images have been taken down and leave it at that or should I add to it that I know my rights mentioning the take down letter that I should have received and the section in Under section 97 (1) of the Copyright, Designs and patents act 1988?
Please help ....

[baxterco]

my 2 cents, for what it is worth... wait for them to respond .... if they do then use the
Under section 97 (1) of the Copyright, Designs and patents act 1988
Granted that is if you are from the UK (assuming that you are bpm-uk

[bpm-uk]

Hi baxterco
Yeah I am from the UK and the act certainly covers the situation I am in. My web designer placed all images on website...he didnt give me list of copyrights or anything...maybe he got them from an assuming free stock image site...I dont know. I am trying to find out more.

So you reckon sit back and wait or send an email apology with images have been removed and leave it at that?

[baxterco]

Oh you have not responded yet?
Did you see the post from "fullefect" it was on page one of this thread.
do a hybird of that letter stating ... well, what letter states. =)

and email them the letter ...
With you being in the UK it seems that you have nothing to worry about (I am not a lawyer, but it looks like UK law actually protects its citizens, wish I could say the same for the good old USA)
Sue or be Sued, its the American way!

I am not too worried about my letter .... best of luck to you and a little skill =)

[Doc]

I would be inclined to agree with baxterco at this point, bpm-uk. I'd simply respond to their main issue, use of their (presumed) images. However, I'd be careful not to admit to any culpability. For instance, I'd say something like:

"Thank you for bringing to our attention, the possibility that copyrighted images had been utilized on our {insert url} website. We are concerned with the protection of intellectual rights of others, and so, have removed the images in question, while we investigate the situation. Please be assured that if our investigation determines that such use was unauthorized, the images will be permanently discarded, and an apology will be forthcoming."

I'd not invite any escalatation at this point, bpm-uk. Save that ball for your next volley.

[baxterco]

I agree with Doc, do NOT admit fault, do NOT admit that they are or are not the photos.
Just that a copy write is in question be it the image or not and the image are being taken down at your discretion.

keep it short sweet and to the point and do not apologize

[bpm-uk]

Thanks Doc
Gives me some food for thought as I write my response..
The letter gave me a huge shock earlier I can tell you...but seeing that I am not on my own and small guys can hit back makes me feel better.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by bpm-uk

Thanks Doc
Gives me some food for thought as I write my response..
The letter gave me a huge shock earlier I can tell you...but seeing that I am not on my own and small guys can hit back makes me feel better.

And that shock effect is what they're banking on, to get some people to cough up the money, bpm-uk. Take that away, and they have very little to stand on. Best of luck to you, and please let us know what transpires.

[Dustie]

I'D SURE NOT RECOMMEND ANYONE IGNORE ANY LETTER CLAIMING COPYRIGHT. I'd write back being profusely sorry, tripping over yourself appologizing, letting them know you had no idea and that you have immediately removed the offending image(s) and also added a link back to Getty Images suggesting other's visit their site and use their great services. If you make money with your website, I'd seriously consider buying a subscription to istockphotos (Getty's least expensive stock photo site) to try to make amends because they can sue you for BIG BUCKS AND WIN!

Aren't most of us on the internet to make money, either directly by selling a product and/or service, or indirectly by running paid advertising on our pages? Do you blame Getty Images, who's life blood is selling licenses to high quality stock images, for trying to protect their income? Wouldn't you all do the same?

The law that says "the person had no idea the image was copyrighted so is innocent" would have to prove that they've lived in a vacumn for the last 10 years. Nearly everyone now knows the law that says as soon as a creative work is created, it's protected by copyright. THIS MEANS THAT EVERYONE SHOULD ASSUME EVERY IMAGE IS COPYRIGHTED, unless they know for sure it's not. If someone buys a website, or grabs an image from an email, or somewhere else, and they attempt to make ANY money though their website (google or yahoo ads on their site, local ads which paid to be on their site, asking for donations, etc, then they are certainly eligible to be sued and will have to pay to defend themselves in court of law and stands a good chance of being guilty of copyright infridgement. If that image is copyrighted through the government the compensation can be as much as 100,000.00 PER INFRINDGEMENT. Borrow 5 images, you could end up owing 500,000.00.

As for simply asking for them to remove their image, there is absolutely no deterent in that option to stop others from taking their images, using them until they are "caught" and then changing the image. We'd like to think this was a perfect world and that other's wouldn't do that, but we know better. Getty relies on their image licenses to pay their employees and bills for heaven's sake. They can't have people on the net "borrowing" their images and using them for months at a time, with no threat of significiant punishment. I have a feeling, if it went to court, Getty would have a really strong case against the client, unless they made absolutly no money, or no future promise of monitary gain, with their website on which the image was used for design or enhancement.

Do you think it's right to download copyright music for free? If you do, then you are wrong. It's not right, and neither is using images for free unless you know for certain that they are, indeed, free to use.

Getty images is obligated to go after those that would use their images illegally. It's the only way for them to keep their reputation high with their photographers and to protect their images and the images of their photographers.

If you need professiona, high quality images, for 49.00 through Stock Photos | Shutterstock: Royalty-Free Subscription Stock Photography & Vector Art, one can buy a license to purchase 5 royality free images from their over 6 million professional images. These are some of the best high quality images on the net. That's less then 10.00 image and i'd put those images up head to head with Getty Images. If you don't need high resolution (smaller resolution is more then enough for a website) then you can get double the images for the same price. More then enough to make your website shine! That's far less then the trouble you could let yourself in for if you use an image you don't know where it came from that may have a big gun bodyguard behind it.

I am a new stock photographer, and believe that www.photospin.con and Stock Photos | Shutterstock: Royalty-Free Subscription Stock Photography & Vector Art are two of the best and least expensive sites for high quality stock photography. If you're a photographer and don't know about Stock photography, go check out my site www.dustie.com/stockphotography.htm and maybe you'll find this would be a way for you to make money with the hundreds of images sitting on your computer taking up space. You keep the copyright, just license the images to the public as Royality Free for certain uses. It's a great program.... If you decide to do it, shutterstock has a referral program. If you go sign up through the link on the site I gave you, I'll be tied to you and recieve a small percentage of your sales (doesn't affect what you make). That would be great, expecially if you are a fab photographer and eventually make thousands on stock photographers. Hey, it's possible...I know someone making over 5,000.00 a year on his stock photographer galleries. He's on every stock photo site with thousands of images taken over the last 5 years.

BOTTOM LINE....if you can't make your own images, or take the pictures you want, or find a picture you want to use on some of the free sites (Morgue Files: Web Design Graphics & Website Image Elements is one) then buy your photos from a stock photo site and don't run the risk of being sued, or even threatened with suit.

Honesty and fairness is always the best policy, really.

[Jean-Luc]

Originally Posted by Dustie

Honesty and fairness is always the best policy, really.

Shouldn't this be addressed to Getty ?

Jean-Luc

[bpm-uk]

Wrote a reply to Getty similar to the sentence Doc used a few posts back. I have had a reply

"Thank you for your email and investigatory efforts. Please contact me by June 30, 2009 with an update on the status of your inquiry. If I can be of assistance in the interim, please let me know."

Shall I do the apology email now? and then see what happens?

[astro]

About 4 years ago I built a site for a friend and whilst on the hunt for images I spotted one on a website for DJ I knew. So I asked him if I could use it. Fine he said no probs, he thought is was off a clipart disk! So I did.

After a while a letter to the website owner from Getty requesting immediate removal with a fee for temporary use or buying the use of the image for stupid money.

Horrified (I now check everything twice) I immediately removed the image the same day the letter arrived. Then ignored everything else in the letter.

Never heard another word since. That was two years ago

Astro

[andrewbrott]

Well folks, my saga continues with Getty. Apparently, they aren't making money any other way but to go after people that make an honest mistake and try to correct it when it's brought to their attention.

My file was sent to NCS Recovery in Florida. I've been contacted a couple of times from them. I offered to settle this issue with Getty for $250.00 (the original demand was for the standard $1000). They have counteroffered with $650.00. Not even close.

I know that igoring Getty and NCS Recovery will not work and eventually they will continue to come after me, but being a one man shop in this economy, I am barely surviving. So I am tired of the BS and have decided to reject their offer and just move on. No more contact with them. If they sue, so be it. I will simply close down, and being an "S" Chapter Corporation in Oregon, they will not get a time. Funny that they area actually willing to spend money to get a lousy $650.00 over an honest mistake. I simply can't give them what I don't have.

What I truly wish is that there was a way to let people know worldwide not to do business with companies like this and what their tactics are. They need to be held to a higher level of ethics.

[skeeznergirl]

My husband got a letter a few months back from Getty. We researched and found forums like this one and we ignored the letter. We just got another letter today. What should be do? Like everyone else in the world, we do not have 1300 bucks to dish out.
I saw some people on here said they ignored the letter and never heard back from Getty. Others of you have ignored and even after months or even a few years, you still got sent to a collections agency.
What should we do?

Thanks

[Dr-DaveLProus]

Hi folks,

Well I found this thread very useful having received one of these letters from Getty so many thanks to the posters here!

Like some others in this thread, I am from the UK and pointed out things like the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the Administration of Justice Act 1970 and the Malicious Communications Act 1988 to them having already removed the image after their first letter and ensuring that I was completely unaware of any copyright.

They got back to me after a couple of weeks saying that they still want compensation and they reckon that they basically don't accept what I quoted in the above acts. They funnily enough studiously ignored my request for evidence that the image (accidentally) used had never been royalty free or licence free prior to, say, getty buying another image or subsequently acquiring the image some other way.

I have emailed them back to request this again and I am basically going to keep delaying them like this until they get bored and give up. They are not getting a penny out of me!

Does anyone else here have an update on their Getty status?

Thanks.

[MacWheelie]

Hey Guys,

I've been reading this forum with great interest. This morning I received a letter from Getty demanding £800 for an image used. Horrified I turned to the forums to see how best to handle this.

Thanks to you all for writing and stating your cases. Will let you know how it goes.

Cheers

[sammyman]

Getting sued is expensive business even if you are in the right defending it can cost you a firtune. To then go back to court to get damages or costs is as a lawyer friend puts it, i"if you escaped from the lions den would you go back to get your hat"?

Getty's problem if they take one of these cases to court and lose their good little erner is over and so while they are making a profit by frightening people into paying theywill be happy with that.

My solution in this day and age is to put the web site ownership into a propriety limited company that has a paid up capital of $2 and don't do any business or buy any assets in that company. That way if they do go to court which would be highly unlikely and get a judgement against you there will be nothing to collect anyway. There Lawyers won't take a no asset company to court anyway.

If you are waiting on tender hook hoping they don't act move your bsuiness and assets into another company now and leave the one they are maybe going to sue penniless. I have been bantering back and forth with them over 3 small images and they originally wanted about $4K and then discounted to $3K but I have offered them as a good will gesture $50 as being 10 times what the images would have cost. Yet to see what they come back with.

[thebadhackerz]

will removing the images from the website after getting the notice helps ?

[Doc]

Originally Posted by thebadhackerz

will removing the images from the website after getting the notice helps ?

It certainly won't hurt, regardless of how the issue develops.

If in the worst case, it develops into a lawsuit, by having removed the images immediately, you won't have demonstrated an attitude of belligerence.

Continuing to use the images after being notified is sure to anger the image owner, making the situation worse.

If you do not personally own the images and the exclusive rights to them, I would recommend removing them immediately.

However, I am NOT an attorney.