SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 11 of 33 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 808
  1. #251
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Smile

    Hi again ionisedlight
    Ta for the post/information. That backs up my thoughts as well.

    One does for sorry for people that are not so business/law aware and are paying as they have not investigated it on the net and found these forums etc.
    Cheers

  2. #252
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No one has really described how they used these photos. Are people getting nailed for wallpapers? Is it just banners and editorial type photos? What would be the best way to protect yourself against users who upload wallpapers to a community section? Can you invoke the "YouTube" defense?

  3. #253
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I got a letter for an image I bought from ebay,Dont pay them, tell them you took the image down & to leave you alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZonePlate
    No one has really described how they used these photos. Are people getting nailed for wallpapers? Is it just banners and editorial type photos? What would be the best way to protect yourself against users who upload wallpapers to a community section? Can you invoke the "YouTube" defense?

  4. #254
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by uk_guy
    I got a letter for an image I bought from ebay,Dont pay them, tell them you took the image down & to leave you alone.
    I haven't received any letters yet, but I am doing my best to limit my exposure. Right now, I am only concerned about forum and wallpaper images. I think I'll be ok with forum images, since I won't allow guests to view any images. That should keep their bot from sniffing around.

    I think I may have to move the wallpaper section over to my forum in order to provide the same protection.

  5. #255
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had a small image, (not that the size is relevant) low res image on my index page as purely art work/decorative. Sort of border like picture, 200 pixels in size etc. So I was not making any money from it, selling it or using it any posters etc or in anyway to push my website forward. It came from a free template site over 3 years ago. Never even heard of Getty untill now, let alone stolen it from them or anybody/anywhere else.

  6. #256
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Getty Images Sending Fines And Invoices

    I have received a huge invoice from Getty Images for unauthorsed use of some of their photo's. I do not agree with image theft and copyright should be protected. However, like many people, we were given these images by a third party web designer and were inadvertantly using them. We were not aware they were copyrighted and if we were, we would not have used them. We also, would not have paid the huge price being claimed by Getty as they are many times the market value. I understand if we do not pay, they will send debt collectors. This is not an acceptable business practice and I will not be using Getty Images for as long as I work in a creative field. Neither will anyone else I have spoken to about this. Meanwhile, I am led to understand that if you did not know the images were copyrighted (which most of us did not), then they can't sue for damages. And if we have not entered into a contract then they cannot bill us. Their invioices also are in breach of DTI and customs regulations. I would like to set up a defence group with similar individuals. If we all contribute say 50, we could get a barrister to act on our behalf as a group and prevent Getty from picking us off one by one. There is safety in numbers, is anyone interested?

  7. #257
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just so you know, your thread will probably be merged with this one.

  8. #258
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was as stressed as you sound last week but after reading this forum I have learnt that getty dont have a leg to stand on,they are hoping that if they sent out 100 letters a week and 1 site owner pays,they get 1000-5000 a week for doing a mail merge !!!,

    Just chill out & read the forums


    Quote Originally Posted by RobertN72
    I have received a huge invoice from Getty Images for unauthorsed use of some of their photo's. I do not agree with image theft and copyright should be protected. However, like many people, we were given these images by a third party web designer and were inadvertantly using them. We were not aware they were copyrighted and if we were, we would not have used them. We also, would not have paid the huge price being claimed by Getty as they are many times the market value. I understand if we do not pay, they will send debt collectors. This is not an acceptable business practice and I will not be using Getty Images for as long as I work in a creative field. Neither will anyone else I have spoken to about this. Meanwhile, I am led to understand that if you did not know the images were copyrighted (which most of us did not), then they can't sue for damages. And if we have not entered into a contract then they cannot bill us. Their invioices also are in breach of DTI and customs regulations. I would like to set up a defence group with similar individuals. If we all contribute say 50, we could get a barrister to act on our behalf as a group and prevent Getty from picking us off one by one. There is safety in numbers, is anyone interested?

  9. #259
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Unfortunately, the DMCA "safe harbor" provisions (the take-down notice) may not apply in this case because those provisions are specifically for ISPs, not individual websites, and the ISP also has to meet the requirements of the legislation (i.e., having a designated agent to receive take-down notices). There's apparently a legal suit against YouTube, with the plaintiff arguing that YouTube does not fall under the DMCA safe harbor provision because it's not an "online service provider."

    In any case, even if DMCA doesn't apply, Getty Images is doing a lot of things that are potentially illegal ... I've seen one letter which is basically an extortion demand -- "if you don't pay up now, we'll use archive.org to see how long you actually had the image on your website and then make you pay more."

    I know that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (eff.org) is aware of Getty's actions and is looking into it ... whether there's anything the EFF can do legally is another question.

  10. #260
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Wall Street Journal Article

    Here is an overview of the royalty free photo movement. My only comment is that as professional designers, we collectively boycott Getty without further discussion.

    Cheers.

    http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB112897424251164666-0mFu92_5xrCHDRrqLE9YeCOfOnI_20061015.html

  11. #261
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Don't forget that royalty free is not the same as FREE. You still have to pay for a royalty free license, but you don't have to pay the creator of the work a "royalty" each time you use it. Think of it as "buy once, use for free later" instead of "buy once, then pay to use later".

  12. #262
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You may find this artical useful.

    http://www.out-law.com/page-816

  13. #263
    Brevity is greatly overrated brandaggio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,424
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JOHNLe
    You may find this artical useful.

    http://www.out-law.com/page-816
    From the linked article:
    A start-up on-line antiques business, Antiquesportfolio.com, has won a case in the UK High Court against its own web site designer which had taken photographs from an antiques encyclopaedia and used them on the web site without permission, in breach of copyright.

    Antiquesportfolio.com argued that due to the infringement it was entitled to refuse to pay for work carried out by Rodney Fitch & Company, and that it was entitled to a refund of sums already paid to the designers. Antiquesportfolio.com also sought damages which included a payment to new designers to cover the cost of them altering the web site.
    You should always have your client sign a standard contract/master services agreement specifically indemnifying the designer/developer (you or your company) - just as software companies have EULA's that allow them to be free of responsibility for damage.

    Be smart - use contracts to protect yourself (and your client) and only use images for which you truly have the rights to use. A very good camera and a little Photoshop wizardry can solve a lot of problems.

  14. #264
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have a fansite for a band that has a photo gallery and in that photo gallery there are quite a few images from Getty. My site is located on a Russian server, how protected are we?

  15. #265
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Where are you at? Your Web host would be bound by Russian law, which wouldn't mean squat if you're in Georgia, the Ukraine or here in the USA. Getty would have to comply with Russian law when contacting your hosting provider about any possible infringement, and would also have to comply with the laws of your country when corresponding with you.

  16. #266
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am located in the UK, I guess that means I could be totally screwed?

  17. #267
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    71
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ice_Cream
    I have a fansite for a band that has a photo gallery and in that photo gallery there are quite a few images from Getty. My site is located on a Russian server, how protected are we?
    Are you using the images legally? If so you are protected.

  18. #268
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ice Cream, since you are in the UK, then British law would apply. If you aquired the images legally (or even were under the legitimate assumption that you were) and Getty tries to go after you, they're going to be up the creek without a paddle, not you .

  19. #269
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Can anyone link me to any articles regarding UK law? I would really appreciate it.

    Everything I can see is American law. Does the UK have the same kinda 10 day time to take the images down?

  20. #270
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There are several UK-centric links in this thread actually. .

  21. #271
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Guess what, I have now had an email today, 08/11/06 from Getty & Co with a scan of the letter I sent them last month, It says:-
    *******************
    To Whom It May Concern,

    Thank you for your attention to this matter. We are in receipt of your correspondence dated September 27, 2006. Getty Images apologizes for the delay of our response. We are in the process of reviewing open and unresolved unauthorized image use cases.

    As the end user of Getty Images' imagery, you are ultimately responsible for insuring that you have obtained the appropriate rights to use the imagery. That means that if you acquire imagery from a web template provider or other such company, you are still liable for copyright infringement if that provider or other such company did not properly license the imagery for you use. Copyright law covers both willful and accidental infringement and it is the responsibility of the end user to ensure that any content that is copied, publicly displayed or publicly distributed does not infringe any copyrights. Regardless of the infringer's intent, the copyright holder is entitled to damages. It is also not necessarily the case that a copyrighted image would have a watermark or a notice of copyright since copyright exists the moment a work, such as a photograph, is created. Any unauthorized use constitutes copyright infringement, for which Getty Images is entitled to recover a retroactive fee. Again, anyone who copies, publicly displays or publicly distributes a photograph, infringes the copyright whether it was aware that the use was infringing or not.

    With respect to the 1988 Act, while efforts to identify the copyright owner may, if proven, be taken into account by the Court when calculating the level of damages, it would not negate liability on the question of infringement which is strict liability. Infringement includes "reproducing work in any material form" and is universally recognized to include electronically in an intangible form. The innocent infringer may have less monetary liability than a willful infringer, but as previously mentioned, the innocent infringer is still be liable for damages for copyright infringement and be subject to other judicial remedies. Further, the Act applies to service providers, not to individual's or business' websites.

    Getty Images appreciates the removal of its represented images from your company's website. However, removal of the images in question solves only part the issue, as Getty Images will continue to require full payment of the settlement demand to settle the matter and avoid further escalation.

    At this time Getty Images can offer conditional discount on the demand by 20% - totaling the settlement demand at 1080.00. Payment must be received by November 15, 2006. Please be in touch with our department so we may resolve this as quickly and as amicably as possible.
    ********************
    So to those in the UK, what do you all think about the above ?

    Especially the 3rd paragraph and statement about the 1998 UK Copy Right Act etc and what they have written "the innocent infringer is still be liable for damages for copyright infringement and be subject to other judicial remedies. Further, the Act applies to service providers, not to individual's or business' websites.

  22. #272
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm no expert on British law (being an American), but my gut feeling tells me that this isn't a legal document.

  23. #273
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Help is on the way

    Well boys and girls, someone asked me to look into this problem last week and I think I found information about PicScout

    Check your log files, see if you find something similar, especially if you've been served.

    Please let me know if you can confirm my findings.

  24. #274
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Very interesting.

  25. #275
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Any advice for a web designer who wants to take the heat for his client?

    I'd prefer to have whatever happens happen to me and not a business who didn't have anything to do with my mistake when I first started almost 6 years ago.
    Getty has reduced the fine from $3600 to $2500 for three photos (Who reduces a fine? What is this a liquidation sale? If you're gonna stand by your fine, simply fine me. I don't haggle down a speeding ticket with a cop while he stands there on the highway... My point is this practice of reducing the fine just doesn't sit right with me... Makes the whole thing appear unprofessional.)

    Someone posted here about the concept of entrapment. Interested by that thought. Additionally, someone also posted about how YouTube gets cease and desists that first ask for content to be removed. The photos have been removed from the client site -- so now I wonder how I can bear the responsibility... I don't have $2500 to pay Getty -- I offered $1500 and they said "no." Again, I'd rather them come after me than the client that I helped years back. They have assets.

    Any advice? I'd just like to know what my rights are.

    Thanks in advance.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •