Forum Moderators: not2easy
I want to send them an invoice as I know that I am perfectly within my rights to do so.
What I'd like to know though is what is to stop the website just taking the photos down and denying using them? I.e. what is the best way of documenting the infringement. Do I need to get a print out signed by a 3rd party or something along those lines?
Many thanks,
Chris
I want to send them an invoice as I know that I am perfectly within my rights to do so.
I don't think that you are within your rights to do this. An invoice is only legal where a contract to purchase exists. I think you can send them a licence agreement to sign with a bill for the use of the images.
With regard to proof, I would take screen shots of their website and also look for it in the Internet Archive. If it's there you should be able to see screenshots that give you an idea how long they have been using the images.
The bottom line is that is they take the images down and refuse to pay you will have to get legal help if you want to pursue this. This could be extremely expensive and not worth pursuing if they don't have any money.
If I were you I would just tell them to remove the material or ask them to credit you with a link to your website. This could save you a lot of grief.
Getty, Corbis and Masterfile have been using tactics similar to those you describe for three or four years and despite all their threats they have not yet proceeded against anyone
Seems cut and dry to me. You steal someone else's work, they have you bang to rights and there's no getting out of it.
Stolen Photos and Content [webmasterworld.com].
* In addition, here's advice from the UK's Intellectual Property Office on how best to proceed in cases of copyright infringement...
[ipo.gov.uk...]
* This could well come in handy. It's a template Takedown Notice [bapla.org.uk] from the British Association of Picture Libraries and Agencies.
Hope there's some help to be had in these - and good luck!
Syzygy
Beg to differ
I am not sure if you understood the point I am making. None of the people mentioned in that article have ever been proceeded against. All they got was empty threats. I don't want to get into the rights and wrongs of my own case but I have had a ridiculous claim from a major imaging company laying on my desk for almost three years now. When I received it I got a lawyer to write them a letter and I heard no more about it.
Since this started there has only been one case that nearly got to court in the UK. It was dropped when the "offender" settled out of court. There was something different about that case but no one seems to know what. None of the thousands of others who have received these claims have been proceeded against since this all kicked off three or four years ago.
I understand that one case also went to court in in the USA. I think it was Masterfile who raised this one and while they won, the judge saw fit to award only a fraction of what they had claimed.
I appreciate that you are 100% in the right and that your case may appear to be more cut and dried but it will not be easy to prove it. Even if you did take this all the way and subsequently won your case and were awarded legal expenses it would cost you many hours of your time.
You have to decide if it is worth it.
Although you do not have to, it will usually be sensible, and save you time and money, to try to resolve the matter with the party you think has infringed your copyright. In some cases it may be necessary to show the court that you have tried to solve the matter with the other party for instance through mediation, before starting court proceedings.If you cannot resolve the matter with the other party, then going to court may be the right solution. But it would be a good idea to seek legal advice at an early stage, and to consider alternative solutions such as mediation before going to court.
Are you in the UK by the way?
While current copyright law still favours the copyright thieves, two evenings spent researching where my photographs were being used amassed me £27,000 in unpaid reproduction fees, writes EPUK moderator David Hoffman
[epuk.org...]
The article is aimed at the non-web savvy photographer, so you have to wade through a considerable amount of stuff aimed squarely at the online novice. Nonetheless, it's a tale of success in asserting one's copyrights - and of pay-back!
Syzygy
Basically I'm not satisfied with people asking people to remove my images. It is very clear they are copyright, the only people interested in using them are in competition with myself and it takes up my time keeping this in check
A removals firm has been ordered to pay nearly £2,000 to photographic agency Getty Images for using a copyright-protected photograph on its website. The company had removed the picture when notified by Getty Images but had not paid a requested fee.
Further...
Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, acted for Getty Images in the case.
Straight from the horse's mouth.
Syzygy
[edited by: Syzygy at 12:42 pm (utc) on Sep. 22, 2009]
I am not sure that they did prosecute. As I understand it they settled out of court. Perhaps someone can confirm this or otherwise.
One problem is finding out how long the offender has been using your image. Both the culprits I'm looking at at the moment don't appear on archive.org.
I may watch the sites for another month or 2 and then send them a licence agreement and a link to a few articles and see what happens
One problem is finding out how long the offender has been using your image. Both the culprits I'm looking at at the moment don't appear on archive.org.
Depends how dumb they are ..and how ressourceful you are ..
Ways you might be able to pin a date on a page of offending site with your images on it ..
Screen capture button is your friend :))( even better if witnessed by notary public or your local equivalent of notary public ..cheaper than lawyer )
Do they have a copyright date on their page ? ( some thieves dont update their own copyright footers ) if it says 2008 and we are 2009 then 2008 counts as the date they started stealing ..screencap ..
Check alexa and others such as first search etc ..they use screencap to get front pages that are "no cache" "no archive"..they date the Image they show as being taken **/**/**** ..you screencap their page for the offender :)
Check for "offending site name review" in your favourite search engine ..about.com are not the only ones ..these also use screencaps ..again often their pages carry the date they did the "cap" ..you screencap their pages ..
Check the offending sites image names in their source code ( presuming they have renamed the images they stole from you ) then do image search for their image file names ( you may have to go past pages 20 etc of image search ) ..then use search engine cache for the image ..it will tell you the date that the image on the framed page was cached ..
Check for references to the offending site in various fora via search engines ..fora posters frequently post screen caps of sites they ref if they like the images ..their posts are dated ..
There are other ways ..these will keep you busy for now ..
When you find somthing dated ..hie thee hence to thine notary public ..and show them what you want them to witness ..
Then there are ways to invisibly protect your images and schedule changes to the dates on their protection ( batch creation dating via steganography etc ) to be able to attribute a stolen on or after this date to an image ..Other ways aswell ..again this will give you food for thought :)
lot of work ..not if you know how to use search engines well ..and as always using them to search teaches you how they are working ..and you can better manipulate them with what you learn from the experience ..
I just had one of my own - which I've tested and found it works.
Get the file headers and it will show the last modified date.
BTW if they tweak and resave before posting your images there are other combination ways to tag your files ..
...IP lawyers who offered to draft a letter for £600. I don't think I'll take them up on this.
The take down letter template was of no use?
The take down letter template was of no use?
Not really because that isn't what I want. I want money out of these people.
That isn't me being greedy either.
My income is based on websites that are successful because of the photos. It takes time chasing up copyright infringers and I'd rather actually be doing something useful that pays.
The alternative is I just give up and accept that my work will be stolen and used for others profit.
If more content owners start enforcing copyright this will become less of a problem
She is now going to draft me a letter which will ask for reimbursement to the sum of a years license fee (at the going rate) and legal costs incurred.
As I am not Getty Images and do have some scruples I will not be charging them £1000 an image.
Will keep you posted
Small site, but they did royally p me off by stealing my photos and putting links to my main competitor next to them. Still I actually feel quite guilty about it.
The next few are not small companies and I am looking forward to getting some money out of them
As I am not Getty Images and do have some scruples I will not be charging them £1000 an image.
OK, first result £800 thank you very much!
:-)
Seriously though - well done on having the wherewithal to peruse this all the way.
How did the offending site owners react? Did they cough up without a fuss, or plead a combination of innocence and ignorance?
Syzygy
£150 of the money is legal fees, which the lawyer included in the demand.
All additional costs are part of the demand, so the more the site owner argues, the more it costs them!
Will keep you posted on the next 2 claims. One regional newspaper and one national government body.
