Getty Images Cracking Down!
- Started
- Last post
- 43 Responses
- acescence0
getty is a publicly traded company. they were recently bought out and are not doing well, getting trounced by small companies that operate for much less. this is just a blanket effort to drum up some revenue, hoping to scare one percent of their customers into giving them more money. just freaked out investors seeing half their investment disappear in less than a year and making some bad long term decisions.
- T-Dawg0
We got one of those letters for a temp image an an unfinished website. The image was about 120x75 px, almost a thumbnail. They demanded $1000 something in damages.
We got this letter a month and a half after the temporary image in question was already replaced by another image. Lost all respect for Getty at that point... and still hold a distaste for anything Getty related.
- jasontroj0
Wayback machine only backups the homepage images right? I don't get how they could use the Wayback machine, esp. if shit is down.
- jfletcher0
Fuck Getty, that's my well thought through response.
- ukit0
Disallow robots.txt and load your server up with stock images, go fucking mental!!!
- gramme0
Good grief, those people are vicious. I'd say ignore them, since it seems their invoicing practices are predicated upon shite.
- trooper0
ive had this and after some haggling (they wanted 16k for 2 images!) i got it down to 2k... however theres a big thread on a small business forum (i forget which one now) that says its just prospecting and scaremongering and that theyve yet to actually chase anyone in the courts... some people have had many letters from them without action.
- ETM0
Shouldn't Getty technically be suing waybackmachine.org then? If they are making a copy of an image that someone allegedly violated copyright on, then they to are as well by storing it and making it available to the public. Getty doesn't care if a found violation/image was actually used to make money or not, so being a non-profit can't be an argument.
- ukit0
I've said it before and I'll say it again...Getty and Corbis need to move to a new pricing model to survive. On one hand you have istock charging a couple dollars an image...on the other Getty charges $130-150 or more, which makes sense for an ad agency but not for small business. If it was closer to $20-30 they would make out like bandits...and what do you lose by making up in volume when you are selling digitally? I don't get it. Going after the consumer is just stupid, it's like the music companies suing people.
- I thought Getty bought out iStock (that's when prices jumped up a buck!) damn you Getty! damn you to hell!T-Dawg
- I dont think you know much about the stock purchasing models. Truth be told... in someways, Getty has kept the value of decent photography high. The problem is the company is too big now.Iggyboo
- ukit0
Also...stop me if I'm wrong but... under Getty's rules wouldn't a screenshot of a site you designed with their pics in your portfolio be violating the law? Even if you bought a license for the client? Or is that considered OK?
- ETM0
Just don't use Getty. Problem solved. Talk about a short sighted strategy. Alienate your clientele for short term gain to hang on a little longer before going under, rather than addressing the issues, changing and recovering some market share. I wonder when they push the wrong person and a clash action lawsuit is launched. So many holes legally in their 'strategy' as it is.
- cramdesign0
Boycott Getty.
- killerqueen0
Ever notice that madirish always tries to go out of his way to be a cunt?
I'll be the first to admit I'm a right cunt, but I don't go out of my way to do it....I call a spade a spade, a cunt a cunt. Madirish just always goes for the devils advocate whether it's warranted or not and comes off looking super annoying.
- you're calling out someone on a response 32 away from yours that happened over 5 hours ago... out of your way much?7point34
- OscarMichelen0
Just wanted to let this discussion board know what is happenign in the United States on this issue. I am an attorney in New York City and represent a number of web developers and e-business companies (including publishers,video sites and self-help sites) tha have gotten Getty letters. It has gotten so bad I posted my own site extortionletter.info just to keep the general public informed about their rights. Getty started this in 2006 and to date no lawsuits have been filed because they don't want a bad legal precedent in my opinion. The photographers that Getty represents likely never registered their photos with any copyright office. That means (in the US) that they would only be entitled at best to actual damages. Since most of these pics can be licensed for $US49.00 that is their actual damages. We have repeatedly demanded form Gett yon behalf of our clients to see their proof of registration and have received no response. Also, some of the photographers may have also placed the images on other sites so that Getty cannot prove that the pics were taken from their site or that it was not permitted to take it from the other site that the image appeared on. Also, most of the time, the alleged infringer takes the pics down immediately upon notice and many courts are likely to view this as a sufficient response and award minimal damages if Getty ever decides to go to court. In short, get some legal advice from a qualified practitioner before paying exorbitant sums on a claim that may not be provable.
- tparsons0
Updated Site:
- ********0
they embed spiders in their images.
- I'll presume you're joking, but then everything else you say is retarded, so.. http://ideeinc.com/detritus
- monkeyshine0
This seems a little amateurish to me. As a professional you should understand copyright. When you download comps from Getty their language for use is very clear. I know a company this happened too...a large company with many people working on projects - it was a simple oversight. They called up Getty and worked out a payment. Getty wasn't trying to wring them.
I have photographer friends who have their work licensed through Getty. I don't think any of them would feel comfortable using Getty if they didn't trust that Getty would protect their copyright.
- <********
- Amateurish? Did you read the part about him using it for only a comp?rayborn3000
- <
- jacklalane0
Does anyone know if Getty actually follows through on these threats?
A client of mine received a letter in 2012, we took down the image and today two years later he says they are still asking for $1050.Client provided the images so my hands should be clean right?
