Most Audacious Digital Marketing Attempt I've Ever Seen

makeusvisible

Free Member
  • Jan 23, 2011
    1,272
    1
    332
    Cumbria, UK
    www.muv.co.uk
    I have worked in the marketing sector for over 10 years now. And I have to say, this week I have witnessed first hand the most audacious, sleazy, and probably illicit marketing effort I have ever seen.

    So the background, our client is a high-end Cheese company. They sell a range of fine cheeses from a range of carefully selected producers. They have a really nice local as well as online trade, they are family-run and genuinely lovely people.

    Several years ago they commissioned us to build their website. We brought in a photographer for some lifestyle shots and product images, but also used some stock photos on the website, where they fell outside the content budget. The site has been live and doing well for 3 years.

    Last week we received an email from the owner, saying she had received an email from a law firm with an accusation that our client was using an image that breached copyright. Below is the email.

    --------
    Dear owner of [our client's website]

    My name is Dawn Simpson, I am a Trademark Attorney of Mason Donald
    King Legal Services.

    I am reaching out to you as your website features content that has
    infringed on one copyright image owned by our client, Festoon House Ltd.

    The use of this image - is featured
    on your web page - [our client's website]
    without proper image credit attribution.

    The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/, a permanent public
    archive of the web, shows the image being used on your website.

    Our client, Festoon House, is happy for their image to be used and
    shared across the internet. However, proper image credit is due for past or
    ongoing usage.

    The image credit to Festoon Fairy Lights must be added underneath the
    image or somewhere appropriate on the offending page with a link to https://festoonhouse.com.au/fairy-lights/.
    Otherwise, we are required to take legal action.

    I have assigned case ID #0628 to track this dispute, which should be
    quoted in all correspondence. Once you have added an image credit to the
    page, the case against you will be dropped.

    This letter is an official notification under Section 512(c) of the
    Digital Millennium Copyright Act (" DMCA"). If this is unresolved immediately
    we'll have to proceed with filing a DMCA legal case.

    I am providing this notice with authority to act on behalf of the
    owner of the copyright(s) involved.

    Regards

    Dawn Simpson
    Trademark Attorney

    Mason Donald King Legal
    One Penn Plaza,
    New York, NY 10119

    [email protected]

    www.masondonaldking.com

    ------

    This email had two instant implications

    1. A thoroughly decent people, our clients were instantly concerned and worried that they have broken the law
    2. A reputational disconnect occurred, as it was ourselves who created the website page in question and had chosen the image.

    My initial response was to calm the client's anxiety and advise that we would deal with it as a matter of urgency. I literally dropped all other work to try to resolve and understand.

    My first port of call was to speak with our project manager who had been involved in image selection during the initial build. We had a reference source for the image, which we had obtained from a stock photography site. The image was listed as 'copyright free, free to use, without credit'.

    My next port of call was to locate and speak to the person who uploaded the image to the stock image site. Thankfully I was able to track him down, he was UK based, and turned out to be a great guy who we might actually work with down the line. Anyway, without digressing.... the photographer remembered the photo. He took the photograph and specifically remembered taking it. He kindly emailed me to explain the image is free to use, and that our clients hadn't done anything wrong. As you would expect he was quite shocked to find that an image owned by him was subject to a copyright claim by someone else.

    At this point, I was able to speak with our client, to alleviate their concerns, although understandably they still had some worries.

    By now, I am several hours into digging through and unpacking the situation.

    I decided to send an email directly to the sender, Dawn Simpson, at Mason Donald King legal. Earlier on I had checked her out on the company website to ensure that she was listed as an employee.

    Then it occurred to me to search her on LinkedIn. I couldn't find her.

    I then searched several of her colleagues form the Mason Donald King website. I couldn't find them either.

    So, I started to google the company, to find reviews, tax returns etc...... nothing at all. The penny at this point dropped.

    Mason Donald King are a fictitious company, with fictitious employees, an invalid phone number listed, and without any company registration. A website set up purely to satisfy the curiosity of anyone Googling them after receiving their email threat.

    So... why....

    Looking back at the initial email, it does several things;

    It starts by trying to build validity of being legal
    It references a stock image, and informs of a breach
    It threatens further legal action.

    However, as an option, they state that their client 'Festoon House' is willing to cease any legal action, in exchange for a credit, and link from their website.

    I believe all of this has been done to get a backlink from our client's site, for SEO purposes.

    Like a dog with a bone, I decided to dig further. I have found over 500 business owners who have been duped by these emails, and have linked off with an image credit to Festoon House.

    I cannot imagine how much worry has been caused by this campaign, how much money has been spent, and how much time was wasted across all the businesses that have received this email.

    I'm left feeling that I have wasted a lot of time, had our reputation damaged (albeit hopefully only temporarily), and that the only people to benefit are the Festoon House website owners who have significantly benefited of over 500 genuine website owners linking to their site, all on the back of a false email, from someone illegally claiming to be a practising lawyer, falsely claiming to own the copyright of images which other photographers took.

    Moral of the story. Don't believe anything which drops into your inbox, until you have checked it out, no matter how genuine it may appear at first glance.
     

    makeusvisible

    Free Member
  • Jan 23, 2011
    1,272
    1
    332
    Cumbria, UK
    www.muv.co.uk
    You could have saved yourself a lot of time simply by asking the so-called trademark attorney for evidence that her client owned the copyright of the image.
    That certainly could have been one approach, and would have given some peace of mind.

    What we wouldn't know however is why this happened in the first place, or that this form of illicit link building is happening, and nor would the photogrpher now be aware that his work is being used in such a way.
     
    Upvote 1

    gpietersz

    Free Member
  • Business Listing
    Sep 10, 2019
    2,781
    2
    738
    Northwhich, Cheshire
    pietersz.net
    Not as audacious as this: https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/03/feds_youtube_theft/ ! They made $20m before they were caught.

    Your fake attorneys were threatening you with US law (DCMA) . Assuming your customer is in the UK as well, how were they going to enforce it.

    It looks like they are after backlinks rather than money, so an unscrupulous SEO, most likely. Probably doing it for other clients too.

    I think either the OP or an admin should remove the link to Festoon as we are goving them another link (albeit nofollow) and publicity.
     
    Upvote 0
    That certainly could have been one approach, and would have given some peace of mind.

    What we wouldn't know however is why this happened in the first place, or that this form of illicit link building is happening, and nor would the photogrpher now be aware that his work is being used in such a way.
    Indeed so. And is Festoon Lights aware that this malpractice is taking place in their name ?
     
    Upvote 0

    Paul FilmMaker

    Free Member
  • Business Listing
    Aug 29, 2018
    672
    1
    299
    London
    www.fnxmedia.com
    Video production here. If my customers don't get a few of these scam emails each year, I'm worried I'm not getting enough business.

    My 'favourite' copyright claims are music. I had someone claiming the rights for the US Navy's marching band (they weren't the President of the US before anyone asks), another for a piece of Beethoven I played myself etc...

    Because of the tsunami of scammers, I only buy music from stock libraries giving the best possible legal protection. One musical library I buy from has a legal / customer services team which sorts it every claim for me. Costs me more money but saves me and my customers a ton of time.

    Death to the scammers!
     
    Upvote 0

    Paul FilmMaker

    Free Member
  • Business Listing
    Aug 29, 2018
    672
    1
    299
    London
    www.fnxmedia.com
    @Paul FilmMaker So you license things rather than use something that is clearly public domain or on which you hold the copyright in order to protect yourself from the scammers?

    That is terrible.

    It's much easier just to license something. For example, I personally played a bit of Bach and someone issued a copyright strike against me. How do I prove that I personally played that piece of Bach? I can't unless I video myself doing it.

    My solution is therefore to buy in music from an agency which gives me strong legal support. It's not about the music, it's about making my customers' lives easier and defending them from scammers. And when I buy in B Roll, I have a similar situation.
     
    Upvote 0

    Latest Articles

    Join UK Business Forums for free business advice