Jump to content

Interesting infringement case settled - UK Court


Recommended Posts

Very encouraging.

It's interesting to see that infringers are still running hopeless defences but it's no doubt because they don't take advice because they have no prospect of ctsts recovery at small claims.

That flagrancy uplift is extraordinary- previous IPEC (and before that PCC) uplifts were much less, 15-25% if any. Very useful and I hope it is soonwritten up on bailii- I'd be interested to see whether he claimed that uplift or if it was determined by the judge.

How did you come across it?

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

But . . . but . . . but . . . but . . . but there's no mention of the photographer "registering" his photographs in the US, an oft-quoted (by some in this forum) pre-requisite for the payment of damages for unauthorised use of a photograph . . . or is it just that no one has told the IPEC about that requirement yet? . . .

 

dd

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's only in the US.....oh, got it. ;)

Judging by the court fee he did ask for the huge uplift- perhaps he was testing the waters, which are now much hotter for infringers. He's done us a service.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,but if photos were stolen and used in the UK,eventually photos will find their way into US sites.

I've registered over 300,000 images over the past several decades.Not that hard.

 

To be honest,I never have to work another day in my life if I didn't want to. I own upscale  real estate and as long as I don't buy a new camera every other day,I'll be financially fine.

 

That is how much has been stolen in my archives since discovering the tools to locate images.

 

And yes,in at least 200 settled cases in the UK,Germany and Australia having the US copyright certificate did help to show that I was serious about my business and securing my rights. It brought the infringers and lawyers to the table a lot quicker to settle.

 

 

L

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that exemplary damages are now available in an English court and one does not need a government document to 'secure one's rights' in court. How many infringers dispute that the complainant owns the copyright? None of mine ever has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one of my cases made it to the judges chambers and that was in the USA and settled. With the right tools and terminology going into these negotiations,you can collect and avoid court.

I've settled more than 700 cases with about 160 more in queue and this is just on 2 images.

 

Also curious-Getty purchased Picscout awhile back...I wouldn't be surprised if Getty started to approach those infringers they find and turn them into paying clients for Getty images.

That would make sense,LOL!

 

L

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that exemplary damages are now available in an English court and one does not need a government document to 'secure one's rights' in court. How many infringers dispute that the complainant owns the copyright? None of mine ever has.

 

There are quite a few cases where the infringer or their lawyer asks for more and more proof of copyright ownership. This is normally just a delaying tactic by the infringer so send what you think is reasonable proof with a statement of truth then proceed to IPEC.

 

Jonathan Webb also had a list of Top 10 ways to ensure you pay the maximum (aimed at infringers): http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/top10.html

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And yes,in at least 200 settled cases in the UK,Germany and Australia having the US copyright certificate did help to show that I was serious about my business and securing my rights. It brought the infringers and lawyers to the table a lot quicker to settle.

 

 

L

 

Linda,

  YOU NEED to register all your images with the US office to prove copyright because you are a US photographer operating from the US. There is no other way for a US photographer operating in the US to prove they own copyright. You are correct for YOUR circumstances. (sorry about the bold bit but I am trying to emphasise the point).

For the rest of us all we need to do is show we own the original file and the process is exactly the same. Ive sued in the US where they have asked is it registered and Ive said no because it doesnt need to be as Im not a US photographer and Ive won thousands (in one case over 10k US). All it means to non-US is that you may not get a lawyer to take you on contingency, although I always have as Ive always done a lot of the pre work for them and its never been for small amounts. Some of them are coming round though to realise that its not a show stopper for non-US photographers as it would be for US photographers.

Also in the EU we dont have a work for hire agreement with clients which is difficult for US infringers to understand.

I hope that clarifies things.

   Joe

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.