gso

Dear SN Massive,

Need some advice, I've had a letter from a company called Superstock.com saying i've been using a copyrighted image on my website for the last 2 years, without proper licencing... I need to remove the image from our website and pay them $3,600!!!!!!!!!!

They've sent me a copy of my site from www.archive.org from 2004 using the same image! Just wondered, before i speak to a solicitor of some sort, if anyone had experiences something like this before??

I provided the image to the website developers, so I cant blame them... and it was provided to me on a cd by a developer (ok..they didnt say i could put it on the website!)

I've had mixed reports... chap from the advertising firm has said "unlucky... but the bset you could do is try and reduce the bill..."

and the webdesign agency said they've had 4 in the last month and completely ignored them....

Will they really get far being a US based company and my site being hosted in the UK???

Any help would be really appreciated!!!

Simon C

I'd say they have got you bang to rights, with no agreement anywhere your liable and I'd agree with the ad guy.

I know if you had done that with 1 of my images, I'd be going for alot more than that!!!!

Unintentionally though it is its theft.

EVOLUTION

have you made personal gain from the image?


are you a company, or is it you personaly they are going after?

DCI Gene Hunt

George................... You're Fcuked....

Cheque book time............

Warwick-hunt

take the pic off then ignore them

so how much have you got from people using your images and how long did it take?

Suresh

Trust you have already removed the image?

Contact www.archive.org and ask them to stop storing your website (see their FAQ). Once they have complied, the compainant's evidence does not exist apart from their "obviously photo-shopped" mock-up of archive.org. Then you can ignore them.

Try at your own risk of course..

jasey

Did they say you couldn't ?

If you obtained the images believing them to be free of copyright then I don't think you need to worry too much.

But hey - I'm not a copyright lawyer !

Fuzz

Taken from Wikpedia and how they "get away with" using copyrighted images.

"Fair use" is a doctrine which may defend the use of some copyrighted matter and images for other purposes under a restricted set of circumstances. It is not a general blanket permission to use text, images or other materials freely without consideration of their copyright status.

Permitted use of 'fair use' content is only under very restricted circumstances where the image or content not only meets the legal tests for fair use but is also, in essence, not repeatable. ie. it would not be possible to replace the image or content with an equivalent free image. This might, for example, include a historical event, but a publicity still of a vehicle, building or living person can be replaced comparatively easily.

An allegation of 'fair use' must be defended by the person claiming that status and, whilst it is for the uploader to determine whether something meets the 'fair use' criteria, if the image could be replaced with a free image and provide the same value to the reader then it is very likely to be removed and a request made for such a free image to be obtained.


Andy

Henrik

iTrader: (5)

I know that is what the law says, but I think that the law is wrong about this issue.

It is not theft as he hasn't actually taken anything, just made a copy. By making that copy, he hasn't stopped anyone else using it at the same time by making their own copy, so how can it be theft?

I know my views are not main stream, but to me, the whole idea that you can "steal" something that is digital is just completely insane, because you're not actually *taking* anything off anyone else


Oh well, I'll go back to listening to my hippie music now

lightning101

Post up your credit card details then


So you think if a graphic designer spends 2 days designing a logo or graphic and his company pay hime £200 a day for this - you think it should be free for everyone to make a copy.

If britain invents a new nuclear weapon, it should be ok for syria/iran to make copies of the blueprints ?

Henrik

iTrader: (5)

No, i chose not to post my credit card details online. However, if I did, you'd be free to copy them if you wanted :-) However, if you used the details to steal my monies, that would be theft, because you'd deny me the chance to use them instead. By merely copying the card details you don't.

Yes, why not? Assume that everyone copied the image because they liked it.
Is the image or work now worth less to humanity than before it was copied to everyone who liked it? The image was probably commissioned by a company in the first place, so the fact that everyone has copied it does not make it worth any less to the design company (in fact, if it's a good design they'll probably get more work from companies who also want good designs)

If Britain posted their designs of the weapons online, I think it's fairly reasonable that they should be allowed, right?

Henrik

iTrader: (5)

I guess my point is that with digital data, the whole notion of property law is not very applicable, as it's so easy to copy.

In the olden days it was very simple. If I took your painting you could no longer hang it on the wall. With digital data this is no longer the case.

d5hof

this is your best solution

they'll give up after a while

2000TLondon

I know nothing about the law here, but I certainly wouldn't pay them anything until you really have to, as in if you are in the dock.....

Simon C

Ok take me for example.

If you were to do that with 1 of my images, by creating a copy and using it. You are committing theft, because I have not granted you permission to use it (I own every single image right). Much like you taking a car without owners consent. You wouldn't dream of doing that so why do this. Just because the make up of this item is 1's and 0's, it still exists and nomatter is make up, I own it.

Add that you by taking the image, are infact making me loose revenue, because by stealing it, I cannot charge you for use of said image. Which is why if found, the bill is several times larger than the price would be if you'd been honest.

TopBanana

There's absolutely no way they'd pursue you for $3,600 internationally. They're trying it on

Sbradley

There's more to it than that, though.

If I take a photograph and run it on my (commercial) website, that photograph is part of the reason people visit my site and, therefore, part of the revenue stream I gain from those visits. If you copy that picture and distribute it then, even though I still have the image on my site, there is no longer the same pressing reason for people to visit to see it and therefore my revenue may well be affected.

Here's another thought. Someone designs a logo for my company - an example already used - and you copy it and distribute it. Now of course it's possible that this could be a Good Thing - my logo is being seen by a wider audience. But I've lost control of how it is used, where it is used and what it may be seen to represent. Its uniqueness as an identifier of my company is gone and therefore its value to me is diminished.

It's theft, plain and simple.

SB

Hoppy

gso, you have not responded to this letter have you?

Just take down the image and say nothing. Take it down now. Silence is a great defense, but in the meantime, comply with their request.

And continue to say nothing for as long as you can. It will prolly go away. But if you then get a regular stream of increasingly threatening letters, by recorded delivery, solicitor's header paper etc, you may need specific legal advice.

Forget about any link between common sense and the law; there is none. Especially where new tech like the internet is concerned. The law is years behind reality. But the law is still the law. And ignorance is no defense, though mitigating circumstances do no harm.

Then... The image has been up there for two years? Why didn't they say anything two minutes after it was posted? Obviously a very valuable pic. They should be more careful whom they give it to. Who should be very careful whom they pass it on to blah blah. How were you to know it was not copyright free? The copyright owners should have made this absolutely clear in the first instance. You used it in good faith, right?

And what harm has been done? Legally they can only claim for damages/loss of earnings. What have they lost? $3,600USD? That tells me they have no touch with reality unless we are talking about a truly extraordinary image. Can they prove it? Tie them up in time and trouble and they'll likely give up. Unless they persue you relentlessly and through formal legal channels, they weaken their case by the day. But be very careful what you say to them. Consider legal advice first. Hence the recommendation for silence - it often works and costs nothing.

If push comes to shove, you may have broken the copyright law, but whose copyright is the image anyway? Copyright can be very complex and there can be multiple copyright owners of any work. And often hard to prove.

Sounds to me like sabre-rattling. Common tactic, frankly, but needs to be take seriously. Just take down the image and say nothing until the **** really hits the fan.

Good luck,

Richard.

PS Edited to add, do NOT refer them to this thread as any form of defense

gso

Thanks for the replies everyone...
Here is the story... I got the image on disk which contained a load of marketing material for a development in Spain (www.sensara.com), and just used it generally to fill gaps in the website... its only on a secondary page!! I had no idea that it was copyrighted... I even had pdf brochures with the image which were emailed to clients, printed out etc etc...


If you go on the above website the image is still there (enter the english version...and its the little stupid image of a couple laughing together (its was actually the worst image on the website!!

I have removed the pic obviously and if you go on archive.org, under the page where it was at... there is only 1 entry, in october 2004, and when you click on it the picture doesnt load??

Question is... if they are seriously out there to protect peoples rights, they must have different methods to prove this other than archive.org?

I'd just like to say, I didnt know I was using a copyrighted image, I didnt steal anything, I didnt know!! I was told i could use the contents of the cd for marketing the project...

Lee247

I would be very suspicious of this. DO NOT send any money. Seek legal advice, all seem like a bit of a scam to me

The Chief

Agreed with the above - it simply wont be worth their while, a few letters alone from a lawyer in the states will cost them that. take it down and forget about it.

anyway even if a court awarded a settlement (in the U.s.) how woudl they enforce it?

It will be some jumped up little nerd in a department getting all shirty 'cos you've stole an image.


failing that coudl you not say the website designer was responsible? and say it was a friend of a friend who charged you 200 quid oh and his name is (make up one) and give a false address. so some old dear receives the lawyers letters for the next six months - if it comes back to you, then you answer to the best of my knowledge that is where i thought he lived.

DCI Gene Hunt

WTF..... $3.6K for a picture of these sad old *****! they should be feckin paying you for the free advertising......



For $3.6K I'd expect full on old person ****....... not a smile and a hug......

GarethE

iTrader: (1)

They're probably just trying to frighten you into paying, and would be unlikely to persue the claim, take the image down and see what happens.

The fact of the matter is that it is theft, you've used an image which you do not own the copyright without permission. It doesn't matter that it was a digital image, or that you haven't sold it, the fact is that you "published" the image on the web without permission.

You have probably got away with it this time, but be careful in future.

If it had been one of my shots, then either pay up or I'll see you in court, and believe me it does happen

DCI Gene Hunt

**** me I've just had a demand for $3,600 USD for using that fecking picture in my earlier post................ barstewards......

Andy-C

Knew that was coming

judgejules

Thats a difficult one. I have found almost all of the pictures on that site on getty images, including one from the same shoot, but it isnt the exact same shot and is owned by "Ingram Publishing". Unless you can find that very image on another stock image website (showing that they dont have sole rights to distribute the image) they then will not know that you dont have the rights to use it. However, if they are pursuing it then I assume they have sole distribution rights so they know who has/hasnt been granted use.

If they have seen it on your site recently and only used archive.org to check how long it had been on there then you really should be paying up. They probably have sent a timestamped print of your website to their solicitor for safe keeping should this turn ugly. I'd also remove your comments about using it in alternate publications, should they find out, it'll increase the cost of the image.

I'd take it down and forget about it for now and see what happens. If they keep contacting you, try Chief's route.

Jules

The Chief

Check out section 4 mate.

http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/co...t_infringement

gso

Thanks for the opinions.

Just been speaking to my colleague who is a solicitor (although not practicing)..and he thinks i should write back to them explaining that I have removed the image, i didnt know it was copyrighted, i was allowed to use it, and that I dont think I owe them anything.

I have a feeling though, if I write back to them... they will become more aggressive!

Warwick-hunt

don't get into it with them, you've removed the picture to be on the safe side, ignore them, if they want to make another move they will

they might just send letters out to anyone using their pics and hopefully 10% respond with a cheque, don't go down their road

take you where
its not like stealing a car, if someone copys a picture from your site then your picture is still there, the car would not be

how do you lose revenue if someone uses one of your pictures? again how much have been able to get from people using your pictures? you forgot to say.........

WRX_Dazza

i didnt read all of this thread, but my suggestion is:-

take the image down and lie low
if there are any repercussions (which i'm 99.9% sure there wont be), say you think the site was hacked as lots of images "appeared to have changed".

end of...

Dazza

AS said above- do not contact them or admit liability!!!