Guy Sued For $4,000. Over Using $10. Pic, Sans Permission

As a general question, out of the millions of photos online, how did they find this one? Is there some kind of identifying information in the photo itself that can be found by text search?

I think it's fair that they be required to prove that the photo is theirs. They would certainly have to do it in court, and if they can't do it there they have no case. What if it is their image, but they can't prove it; they just "KNOW" it's theirs? I think it's fair to ask for a proof of copyright, or whatever. Also some substantiation that $1800 is fair. If they can ask for $1800, why not $36,000 ? Why not $225,000 ? There has to be justification for this figure, otherwise why not $150? How hard is it to find a picture of a piece of meat? What's the demand for meat pictures like, and what is the supply like? If you had to contract someone to make a meat picture, how much would that cost?

Who was the photographer? When was the photo taken? Or did they steal it from someone else, and after a while they simply decided it was theirs, had always been theirs, they own it end of story. What if they stole it from someone else and don't even know it? People retire, quit, get fired, get promoted to another office, etc... The guy that thinks they own it and is threatening legal action may be surprised to discover they stole it also. Maybe.

Long before I paid any money, I would seriously consider all these questions and more.

Such as, how much will they have to pay in attorney's fees in order to take a weak case over a low-quality meat picture to sue you in your state on the chance that they MIGHT win?

Another thought: What if they claim to have copyrighted that image in 2006, and you find it in use prior to that online?
Yet another thought: What is the law with regard to altering someone else's image. How much alternation needs to take place before it is no longer "theirs" ? Is the image you used the same size as the original? Same resolution? Same color balance? Any added text, airbrushing, photoshopping, etc...? And if you found it online, maybe someone else did to. How did it get there? Did they watermark the image? How many other people are currently using the exact same image? Have they also gotten legal letters?
 
Last edited:
Do you think we should wait until the date expires and see what their next move is? The owners have not contacted them, only myself, and I did not give my real info to them, just that I was inquiring details for the owner.:(


a quick google search and i found this thread,
Code:
 http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/business-legal-issues-61/getty-images-after-me-425391.html
Looks like Getty has been doing this for a while as I thought. But it doesnt seem like people have been taken to court. If you dont pay what likely will happen is they'll just get some collect agency on you. Thats about it. Just remove the image. Dont fall for their extortion scheme.
 
For anyone that is looking for some sound advice, this attorney now represents over 500 companies who have received these "lovely warm and fuzzy" letters from G Images, hope it helps:

Code:
http://extortionletterinfo.com
 
Like an internet marketeer, a lawyer is always after the next best thing. [You like to be paid for clicks, they like to be paid for playing your fears...legally]

1. Get legal advice before you answer to such threats (only if you think the threat is serious)

2. Do not get intimidated by the strong language. Its the no.1 weapon a lawyer will use : tell you that you did something wrong, and that you MIGHT suffer the consequences of that certain deed using a very hard language. The "MIGHT" possibility is always hardly mentioned.

3. If they ask you to settle before taking legal action, its a bluff 90 % of the cases. They know their case is a box of shit.

The MO is simple :
They throw e-mails filled with threats->
You get scared->
You look for a way out->
They push you a little bit more, then they offer a way out "SETTLE"->
You take the bait and get ripped off.

As a trick, as soon as you get an e-mail of this kind and you think it is serious, go to your doctor and tell him you suffered lately sudden chest stings, you are demoralized, probably request a few hours of therapy invoking stress and depression but do not mention the written threat, be as evasive as you can be.

Meanwhile play the begging for mercy individual, using e-mails. Do your worst but do not overdo it and use only provable facts. Yes become his e-mail bitching Joe, play his game and let him feel like the hunter and you play the prey. They are always biting this strategy as they feel they are close to their goal, and they will slip for sure.

Now you have a pretty solid case and you can proceed further.

If this kind of actions (suing threats, followed by sudden settling requests) generate medical responses, in this case for the individual threatened to get sued, the lawyer who jumped into action is most likely to become your slave for the next 5 years.

In cases such as "you used my client's picture and we want you to pay us xxxxxx $, because of the damage you caused" your damage will exceed his clients almost every time.

In other words you can make his life a total hell if you play this right. Law is not a big bad scary monster, there are hundreds of scenarios that will literally turn you into a saint.

wow great

this how get them back at own game

serious this great!
 
Several months ago I received an email from someone who claimed to own the copyright to a product I was selling, which, as far as I was concerned was public domain.

I just asked him for the copyright number so that I could check with the US copyright office and he never replied.

I've seen this happen on a number of occasions with public domain products. Sometimes it's down to ignorance of the law and other times it is a scam to get money out of you.
 
Thanks for sharing your story with us, it'll surely save somebody the heartache. Sorry for the loss.
-LuXury
 
Screenshots with date on them

I would say that screenshots can easily be altered. However, it was a business that was in legal trouble, so they have to accept the liability in order to protect their reputation.
 
I can't see that anyone reasonable person would take this to a litigious dispute
once an image has been removed.
Therefore I would have to conclude that lawyers have reached new depths.
As with cybersquatting domains, the money demanded seems to be less than the cost of going legal.
Whatever would Judge Judy say...
 
I have a letter at home from an attorney, and the company suing me for the same thing, except the image was on a set of templates that I downloaded for free. It is funny, cuz they also want $4000, so I told them to take a shit, they would get that sooner.

I am not about to pay anyone $4000 for a stupid picture that was on a stupid template that I download and was up for 1 year, got zero traffic.

These people suck
 
I have a letter at home from an attorney, and the company suing me for the same thing, except the image was on a set of templates that I downloaded for free. It is funny, cuz they also want $4000, so I told them to take a shit, they would get that sooner.

I am not about to pay anyone $4000 for a stupid picture that was on a stupid template that I download and was up for 1 year, got zero traffic.

These people suck

Hint:
There's a huge difference between suing you and sending you a letter.

Despite how much money I make (which is very considerable), any lawyer attempting to sue my company or myself will find me remarkably poverty-stricken... and the company on the verge of bankruptcy (at least showing that on the books)
 
Last edited:
Wayback machine, google cache and so on..

I am more interested in regulations applying to international usage of images.
Let's say I am based in the Netherlands and I am using dutch hosting and I am hotlinking directly to an image instead of hosting it on my server.
I don't see how US based firms, claims, or C&D letters can touch me.

Wayback machine updates it's database in very, very long intervals, so it would take a long time for this to show up there. As per Google, you can request removal of a specific URL, which would prevent tracing this activity as well. Just my two cents.
 
Sorry to hear all that, one thing I have notced is webmasters using images and not even changing the image name!
I wonder?, if I take a few good generic shots, beach, landscape etc... put them on the web with an unusual name or code, wait awhile and then do a google image search, see if they have been used and then send out a few legal looking letters and see if I get paid.

Don't forget the new google image search, you can search by uploading a photo from url and pc.
 
Jeeze, that's rough. Sorry to hear about'cha man. Sometimes, the blackhat catches up to you, even when it's really not that blackhat.
 
If i were you, i would just say i am from China and change the domain ownership account to some wierd name "chichu shapashi" stuff and say

Go f*** up ur self... lol.............
 
What if lets say i am not from Europe but i use USA based hosting. And lets say i do not host copyrighted images on that server but i have uploaded them to image sharing sites?

Would I in that case be in any danger as i do not host anything and there is no proof that I uploaded pictures to image sharing sites?
 
ok a blackhat method to gain $4000 bucks at least every month, just upload tons and tons of pictures to the internet and make your lawyer ready for law suits. ok i know what you are thinking but do it and wait for the bait to ..........OMG am ready to go to court :hungry:
 
wow, this has to be a scam. It just fits so well together. No one ever meets the lawyer, a check is writen, and some internet geeks take a deep breath. The scammer gets away with it, and knows it works. Then it takes ten years for every other stupid shit to catch on. Scammers are smart, and always on the move. Check the BAR. Make sure the guy behind the letter is a lawyer.

Think about it. How many of us really question those of authority? Maybe we should start. It seems simple to do a little check up to make sure. If everyone has said 4k is excessive than something is wrong.

It just smells fishy to me.
 
How can it be proven that after removing an image it was used at all? Logs are just text files, there is not tamper protection. Same with screenshots.


Screen shot would suffice.
There is forensic software that tell you if the image has been altered in any way or form.

Google cache or some other search engine cache
A copy of the web site.( you can down load their whole web site)

I have been a party to these suits...... the judge is the least amused at someone profiting from stolen work.
 
Back
Top