Getty caught me
- Started
- Last post
- 279 Responses
- -sputnik-0
shouldn't getty have to send a "cease and desist" letter before filing a suit?
- BonSeff0
you think photographers respect stock photo sites like getty?
every photographer ive talked to fucking hates them.
- ladyboy0
that sucks pepe - was it a national ad campaign or something?
25k is hardcore!
I sit right next to a great photographer who shoots for new york magazine every week. He said Getty was being bullshit and he sells to Getty. And sure he doesn't give his shit out for free. Still he understands the larger picture
- SteveJobs0
7k is way too much for a 160x160 photo that was used for a comp.
they should have sent a cease and desist first, but obviously, this method of using scare tactics is, in their mind, a reasonable source of revenue.
i'd seek legal help and find out what your rights are in this situation.
and yes, what you did was wrong, but i think a court would better decide what getty is entitled, not getty.
- ladyboy0
Well put Steve Jobs!
- cinder0
What else do you think is gonna happen when companies like Getty and Corbis buy out a massive chunk o fthe world's creative material.
They're not doing it to create the betterment of the arts or push creativity to new levels - they're doing to to have legal footholds so that they can litigate themselves a profit.
Corbis is a loss-leading company. They don't make money - they only spend it.
They're a tax write off for Bill Gates.So basically, Bill needs a write off so he supports and pours money into a money-losing company that still can't make a profit after draining people of their money with cheap cheesy photography and litigation.
It all goes back to Microsoft, man. All of it.
SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL PHOTOGRAPHERS
Do your own PHOTOSHOOTS.
- exador10
this is pretty ridiculous i think...
was the image used illegally? yep..that is definitely not the question..
is 7k an insane charge?..
yep...it is...seems to me that it's a LOT like how the music industry has reacted to mp3's...
didn't the RIAA basically do the same thing?..track folks that downloaded some tunes here and there and whamo, just make up some arbitrary 'you owe us a 10,000.00 bucks' legal argybargy?it's a mistake i think...
sure, big agencies will still use em, but most designers i know now use the cheap sites, like dreamstime etc....
buck a shot...can't go wrong...ladyboy is getting the shaft.
and man...that sounds like a bad porn...
;)
ex
- MrD0
you think photographers respect stock photo sites like getty?
every photographer ive talked to fucking hates them.
BonSeff
(Jul 25 07, 09:36)hates them yet put their photos on them
getty dont get paid = photographers dont get paid
- MrD0
let me ask
if you were hired as sub contractor, you do a design, you submit, they tell you they couldnt sell it. and they said, we will use the design to promote our shop but cant pay you anything for it.
- TwinLobe0
All of this mess raises another question for me: HOW do they actually determine if an image was not paid for?
For example, if Joe Blow shows pieces that he did when he worked at Agency X (which include purchased stock art), how do they know that it's all legit? Seems like a huge amount of time would need to be spent to research this -- and there's a high risk that they could falsely accuse people.
If Joe Blow wants to show his portfolio work, he has every right to do so. It's people like us that keep those guys in business anyway!
- OSFA0
stevejobs is the next one on the sued list...
- MrD0
twin
its rights managed
its easy to track who bought it since it has exclusive rights to a particular person for duration.
- BonSeff0
none of the studio/location photographers i know sell out to them. the photographer gives up all ownership and collects a small commision/
the photographer is totally devalued.
- MrD0
i am not arguing that. you can sell out or dont sell out.
i am just saying, by taking something that doesnt belong to you and argue that its not what its worth, than its degrading creative industry as a whole
everyone has an opinion about what should be worth. but its the seller who sets that amount. if you dont like it dont buy it.
but dont steal the work rather its from a sold out or pure photographer.
if you dont like stock then great, find a photographer to shoot with, which is always better option.
in any case, it does not give any person to steal something to get more work
- BonSeff0
point taken, i was speaking more to this post you made, and my point was that these stock sites devalue photographers and then arbitrarily set a penalty at 7 grand. thats fuckin shady
-- -
if one cant respect other creative work and its value, how can one put a price on his / her own creative work?
MrD
(Jul 25 07, 09:33)
- SteveJobs0
i don't think anyone here is refuting the illegitimate use of the photo.
what i have an issue with is Getty declaring a value on it's use. 7k seems a bit arbitrary to me. and even if it isn't, what greater power granted them the authority to demand such a dubious sum from an individual without a courts involvement?
- Llyod0
pull the image down and don't respond
- Llyod0
are you really a ladyboy?
- MrD0
indeed
$7k seems alot but rights managed cost more than $10 for royalty free.
say $1000 for rights managed
if other client is already using it they are open litigation.To do research on this matter, they would have hired a lawyer internally, and their rate say is $500 - 1000
Their bot tool would also cost money, say $50-100 (spread through out)
Also, administrative cost could be around $500-1000 (someone has to put this in to report and over head of the process)
Collection dept would also cost $100-500
The cost to the photographer would also be around $500-1000 (or less)
Also, not knowing how long this image has been used, they would estimate for past usage. That could be $1000-3000
it just costs money, they need to cover their ass from clients and photographers.
if they didnt take these steps, photographers wouldnt sell photos to them or clients buy them
i mean, if you wanted an exclusive image, but you find out that someone else is using a stolen one out there, and getty wouldnt do crap about it, you wouldnt buy it from them. To me that makes good business.
- k0na_an0k0
this is why i grab all my images from a google image search and your guys' myspace/flickr accounts