Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All

 

I am not a novice when it comes to misuses but this one is leaving me a bit flummoxed.

 

It relates to a Flickr shot from way back. A company "followed" me on Flickr a while ago and I was a bit suspicious as they have no photo presence on there. I have just found them using one of my Flickr shots on their web site,  very prominently on two pages and smaller on two others. They also state "Photo courtesy of..." on one page and give me a name check though never had the courtesy to inform me that they were using it!

 

My initial contact has been ignored, and they have done a half hearted takedown of the two big shots and a smaller one, but left one on there and my credit line.

 

This is not an Alamy shot, but using the Alamy calculator for the usage it is coming up with £29 per web use. I am going for a 3x uplift of cost due to the flagrancy, but £29 per usage does not seem particularly high.

 

Anyone have any advice on how to go with this one?

Many thanks

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at this.

http://www.epuk.org/Opinion/994/stolen-photographs-what-to-do

and don't send a bill. It limits your options later. Send a letter to gather information and see what response you get.

I've recently had a settlement and it was based on the highest possible fee for RM for the period of use which I was able to work out. They may tell you how olng they've been using it, of course. I then added about 25%- three time is too much and a court wouldn't uphold it.

Assuming it's a UK site, you are certainly looking at hundreds. I settled for just shy of £1000 for a single photograph in a brochure for a year.

The small claims court process is now available if they won't settle.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mark, I was always under the impression that 2-3x was normal depending on the flagrancy. It is indeed a UK firm, so I am hopeful of recovery here.

 

I have not, nor will I send a bill until things are resolved, but have requested a dialogue re compensation, which as I say has so far been ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on how flagrant, I suppose- whether there was an attempt to remove credit, disguise the image, conceal its source, that sort of thing. I've certainly read up a case in the PCC where only 25% was given, but none of those things applied.

Anyway flagrancy isn't something you mention before court, you just factor it in to any offer you make.

Run each use through the fee calculator and work from there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a case just now being handled by http://www.ipprotection.net/

 

I've dealt with cases myself in the past but it takes a lot of time and stress so I decided to give them a try. I collected all the info like screenshots and addresses and handed them over for them to deal with. They sent me a copy of the draft letter they were going to send to make sure I was happy with it before sending it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They took one on for me but they only collect, they don't litigate so it stalled.

Now we have the small claims track I wouldn't think it necessary to use a solicitor- you can write the letter they'd write yourself and save the commission- you decide yourself the settlement figure IPP offer.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

I collect from many infringers every month.I have thousands of infringed photos online and not enough hours in the day.

My minimum license fee is $300 to that I add x3=$1200 for each URL and each image up to 1 year.

I've collected in the 5 figures and my demand letter also states if the license fee is not paid I reserve the right to file suit for copyright infringement seeking the max allowed by law.

 

BTW-I register all my images w/the US Copyright office.

 

Sometimes it's a tough fight to collect and they find in time they should have negotiated with me because my lawyers step in and the don't go for the small amounts of $1200-2400.00. Minimum is $50,000 and yes,I've collected.

 

Sick of my photos being ripped off.WIsh we could sue websites in China/Taiwan/Malaysia/Russia

 

L

Link to post
Share on other sites

I collect from many infringers every month.I have thousands of infringed photos online and not enough hours in the day.

My minimum license fee is $300 to that I add x3=$1200 for each URL and each image up to 1 year.

I've collected in the 5 figures and my demand letter also states if the license fee is not paid I reserve the right to file suit for copyright infringement seeking the max allowed by law.

 

BTW-I register all my images w/the US Copyright office.

 

Sometimes it's a tough fight to collect and they find in time they should have negotiated with me because my lawyers step in and the don't go for the small amounts of $1200-2400.00. Minimum is $50,000 and yes,I've collected.

 

Sick of my photos being ripped off.WIsh we could sue websites in China/Taiwan/Malaysia/Russia

 

L

+1

p.s. you can also sue the website Hosting companies, if the sites are hosted by independent company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Linda, the OP is in the UK and so is the infringer. We don't have statutory damages, US registration isn't relevant, and our courts wouldn't award anything like your amount for a small-scale infringement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Linda, the OP is in the UK and so is the infringer. We don't have statutory damages, US registration isn't relevant, and our courts wouldn't award anything like your amount for a small-scale infringement.

I've collected form all over the world.On my own and thru imagerights since the late 1990s. Registration of copyright still is valid to prove ownership.If your photo was stolen once,I'm sure it will be stolen a million times.

Best to bulk register everything BEFORE the infringement.

I've collected on my own in the UK many many times on my own and thru imagerights.com

I suggest you contact them. You also need the URL as well as a screengrab.

I just collected $950 from the Netherlands and waiting on $1200 from a UK company.

 

L

 

L

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a case just now being handled by http://www.ipprotection.net/

 

I've dealt with cases myself in the past but it takes a lot of time and stress so I decided to give them a try. I collected all the info like screenshots and addresses and handed them over for them to deal with. They sent me a copy of the draft letter they were going to send to make sure I was happy with it before sending it out.

 

As soon as there is a sniff of litigation or the infringer puts up any sort of fight, IPP will drop you without a thought.  They are not a law firm and so will not pursue the matter.  In my opinion, they are a waste of space!

Edited by Sheila Smart
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've got a case just now being handled by http://www.ipprotection.net/

 

I've dealt with cases myself in the past but it takes a lot of time and stress so I decided to give them a try. I collected all the info like screenshots and addresses and handed them over for them to deal with. They sent me a copy of the draft letter they were going to send to make sure I was happy with it before sending it out.

 

As soon as there is a sniff of litigation or the infringer puts up any sort of fight, IPP will drop you without a thought.  They are not a law firm and so will not pursue the matter.  In my opinion, they are a waste of space!

 

I agree.I found ippprotection to be useless after giving them a case almost three years ago as well.Not to mention communication is very slow and horrible....One of the worst companies I've dealt with in that regard.I think it's just a one person organization.  L

Edited by Linda
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting - IPP settled for me when litigation was mentioned, but ImageRights pulled out under similar circumstances. Neither are particularly easy to deal with in my experience, and both have refused a number of cases from me. Presumably not lucrative enough. I found IR to be downright rude when I chased them after six months of silence. I was told in no uncertain terms to go away and they'd tell me when there was something to say, which in the end they did not - they just dropped the case and didn't inform me. Now they charge per case there is little incentive to go with them again.

 

Cheers for the advice folks. Another mail off to them today and we'll see where that gets us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair's fair, IPP did what they could for me, bearing in mind they don't litigate. I would never have got as far as I did without them and it didn't cost me a bean. Their rules of engagement, if you like, are set out very clearly in advance. I had no problems with contact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter, should it be advanced as a defence. AS you probably know an employer is liable.

Unless they stick their heads in the sand, they will now take advice and settle.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Investigating is actually part of the civil procedure rules pre-action protocol- had they refused they might have been liable for the costs of your getting a court order to force them- but the real point is to find out what they've used and for how long.

Any more than a couple of weeks and they're stalling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I pay imagerights by the year. Many cases they did not take or couldn't collect from. I'm a bit frustrated by the fact as soon as they get a case of mine lately they just pass it onto the other collection agency.

I think they've grown very quick and probably have their choice of what cases to take and what to pass. I've collected on cases when they've given up and went back to the table.

 

They have given cases to another collection agency which also paid to have a lawyer take the infringer to debtors court.However the court lets the infringer drag out a payment plan for years.

I have one of those that settled a few months ago.Not quite sure of the infringer even made that 1st payment.

 

I've had a few 'bitch out' sessions with my local senator. I use to photograph him quite a bit at events years ago so we do know each other. If photogs and creators would band together with one voice to state viable solutions the laws could

change;that balanced with this fair use crap which I don't even think he himself understood.

 

It would be nice if we had other choices as far as collection.Not just collection agencies but a court system that is cheaper and does not require we travel to another location because that's just a waste of money. SKYPE court!

 

L

Edited by Linda
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately we do have that option- a small claims court for copyright infringement. I'm sure it's the reason that settlements are more forthcoming now. Infringers know they can't ignore a copyright owner or rely on the threat of legal costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.