Copyrighted Image

[alpha7158]

I have a friend who owns a website where they used images given to them by their supplier.

They have received a cease and desist letter from GettyImages claiming that they own the licence and are demanding that they pay £1200 for the unlicensed use of the image.

His supplier has since gone bust and he has concerns regarding the legality of the claim. The image has since been removed but £1200 seems excessive for an accidental copyright violation that was corrected on first correspondence.

If he does not own the image, he is in breach of copyright. The question is: Is it unrealistic that the copyright holder is legally entitled to this £1200?
For the purpose of this thread lets assume that he will be unable to obtain

Disclaimer: I am asking for your opinions. Any replies will not be considered as legal advice. Anyone reading this thread then must be aware that any advice given in this thread is an opinion and if it is acted upon then it is done so without holding the advice giver liable for any damages.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Your friend has just entered a world of pain and joins the tens of thousands of people who have had such letters.

It is NOT a C&D as getty do not issue them, it is a simple offer of settlement, but in effect is a demand for payment, or the production of a valid licence.

1. can he get a copy of the original licence from the supplier (although i doubt this will cover him anyhow)

2. It is unreasonable, but not unlawful, and sadly there is nothing he can do. he now has the option of agreeing a reduced amount and payment terms, or waiting until they pass it on to Pincent Mason, who will then add another £600 in fees. If it goes to court (Getty have only taken 1 person to court in the Uk and that was settled out of court but rubber stamped) if it goes to court, it will be in the high court and costs could be horrendous.

The action of getty is morally bankrupt, but sadly at this stage, legal.

I have been involved in cases like this (helping not being chased as I buy all my images from getty), I have been involved in the US and Uk for many years, it is not good news unfortunately

 

[drounding]

A client of mine had similar issues with a portion of an image used in a header graphic on a site and they received a similar letter. They also received the image second hand and were unaware at the time of any infringement.

They are very heavy handed and you really may have little option but to make a settlement offer. The amount they are requesting is typical of such requests.

 

[VeryMark]

I'm afraid I can only endorse what has been already said - the only option may be for your friend to attempt to blame the supplier and negotiate a lower amount.

The moral of the story is, don't use images unless you are sure as to their legality - even very simple images may be someone else's copyright!

 

[Eagle]

A simple three step plan:

• Get costs reduced

• Pay them

• Sue the f*cking arse off their "supplier".

 

[FreelanceSoftwareDeveloper]

Thats a different take to what i'd heard before. I thought in the UK they had to send a C&D first, the basis being that they cannot prove where you sourced the image from?

How does this work anyway, I believe Getty own iStockPhoto? If I bought an image from iStock do you need to provide a link to exactly where it can be used?

This is the thread I have read previously on this, see post 5?
http://www.webproworld.com/webmaste...-from-Getty-Images-for-Unlawful-Use-of-Images

 

[SneakSMS]

Thats a different take to what i'd heard before. I thought in the UK they had to send a C&D first, the basis being that they cannot prove where you sourced the image from?

How does this work anyway, I believe Getty own iStockPhoto? If I bought an image from iStock do you need to provide a link to exactly where it can be used?

This is the thread I have read previously on this, see post 5?
http://www.webproworld.com/webmaste...-from-Getty-Images-for-Unlawful-Use-of-Images

Most of the images on my site are stock pics bought from istockphoto, never had to specify where they were going to be used. Not entirely sure how they figure out if they're being used legally or not. I've had their images up for a couple of years and have never heard a peep.

 

[alpha7158]

Update: I think I was wrong about the supplier being bust. It looks like they just stopped doing business with the supplier. It also looks like the supplier has the correct licence so everything should be OK.