From: Jerry Stuckle on
Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <4ad96280$0$1668$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, Ray Fischer
> says...
>
>> A good reason to avoid Getty like the plague.
>
> A good reason not to steal images. Stealing images and posting them on a
> publicly accessible site is one of the dumbest things one can do.

Very true. Unfortunately, there are too many "webmasters" who either
think the:

1) anything on the internet is free for their taking, or
2) if they steal it they won't get caught, or
3) if the get caught, all they have to do is take it down

And in this case, one of those "webmaster's" clients got nailed.

I think the original demand was very appropriate. They should have just
paid it an continued to use the picture.

I also think we're going to see more of this, as image theft is getting
rampant on the internet.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(a)attglobal.net
==================
From: NotMe on



2
0
0
8

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
;

n
o

p
o
r
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
i
s

p
o
s
t

m
a
y

b
e

u
s
e
d

a
n
y
w
h
e
r
e

e
l
s
e

o
r

a
r
c
h
i
v
e
d

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

w
r
i
t
t
e
n

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX18nBX4/QYfvlU/gWx3Ad8aiHGKF7pw9kXuf94zb6qqWRA==
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 091016-0, 10/16/2009), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZS7WE19gJxnQoxqfacdzK5QDUaY=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.netfront.net alt.www.webmaster:4729 rec.photo.digital:34218


"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4ad9f75f$0$1635$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
: Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
: >Alfred Molon wrote:
: >> Follow-up article on that infringement case which Getty brought to
: >> court:
: >> http://copyrightaction.com/forum/the-real-cost-of-being-sued-by-getty
: >>
: >> see also
: >> http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=10367
: >>
: >> 2000 GBP paid to Getty, 24000 GBP total expense
: >
: >Frankly, I think they got what they deserved. They stole an image, got
: >caught, & they paid the price.
:
: They got off easy. They should have had to forfeit their entire
: business and turn over any 1st born sons.
:

Forfeiting the entire business is not without precedent. Most such cases
involve patent infringement but has been know to occur with copyright as
well.

We operate a graphic studio and are very protective of our copyright. The
majority of infringements are handled at the level of a letter from our
attorney. Those few that don't the proceeds, over expenses, are used for
scholarships.







From: Eric Stevens on
On 17 Oct 2009 16:54:15 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Alfred Molon <alfred_molon(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer
>
>>> A good reason to avoid Getty like the plague.
>>
>>A good reason not to steal images.
>
>When a company uses that as an excuse to extort ridiculous fines from
>people to employ lawyers then it's a good reason not to do business
>with them.

The fines only seem ridiculous to the thief.



Eric Stevens
From: Eric Stevens on
On 17 Oct 2009 16:56:07 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>NotMe <me(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>news:4ad96280$0$1668$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>: Alfred Molon <alfred_molon(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>: >Follow-up article on that infringement case which Getty brought to
>>: >court:
>>: >http://copyrightaction.com/forum/the-real-cost-of-being-sued-by-getty
>>: >
>>: >see also
>>: >http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=10367
>>: >
>>: >2000 GBP paid to Getty, 24000 GBP total expense
>>:
>>: A good reason to avoid Getty like the plague.
>>
>>You could say the same of tax evasion, bank fraud, theft of utility and
>>cable service.
>
>I am competely in support of people getting their money for their
>work. But Getty is using photos in order to extort money to pay
>lawyers. In my opinion (and that's for the lawyers).

Would you be happier if Getty did it himself?



Eric Stevens
From: Ray Fischer on
Eric Stevens <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>On 17 Oct 2009 16:54:15 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>Alfred Molon <alfred_molon(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer
>>
>>>> A good reason to avoid Getty like the plague.
>>>
>>>A good reason not to steal images.
>>
>>When a company uses that as an excuse to extort ridiculous fines from
>>people to employ lawyers then it's a good reason not to do business
>>with them.
>
>The fines only seem ridiculous to the thief.

Demanding 10 times the usual fee for a low-res version of the licensable
photo isn't ridiculous?

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net