It looks like thousands of website owners have been receiving what I would call an extortion letter from the 500lb gorilla of the image licensing industry. This is a now wide spread scare tactic and needs to be stopped. When a large corporation such as Getty Images appears to be violating the RICO act it should raise a few red flags for the people in charge.

Now, here is a little background on Getty Images for those who who’ve not heard of them. Getty is a photography distributer. That means they acquire images from photographers and provide countless media sources, designers, and other agencies that utilize photography with the photographer’s works. Read this "They are the middle man or retailer that sells licenses for photographs; they are typically not the author/creator".

This week I received a call from a client who has received one of these threatening letters where Getty Images is claiming copyright infringement for photos used on their website that were acquired from legitimate sources “other than Getty”. In this case Getty is demanding a settlement payment of $1000 per image from the client claiming statutory damages. Now, when you acquire images 5+ years ago from a “legitimate source” you only have one reaction. WTF? So, I did some research into what’s happening and learned a lot, and frankly it's pretty scary.

Those who know me know that I am all about fair-use and fair-compensation. But, I am strongly against someone taking advantage of the good nature of honest people for the sake of fattening the corporate bottom-line, and that is just what is happening here. You see, Getty Images is currently up for sale, profits have been failing, and they have had to lay off 5% of their staff. Anyone in business could see this as a tactic to inflate profits pre-sale. (The funny thing is any buyer who does their due diligence is going to see right through that and look at long term profitability.)

Here is the breakdown of what I learned about this scam. (Yes I said SCAM).

First, Getty is utilizing a third party service that scans websites for images that appear in Getty's library. (Pretty cool tech, but I digress), If a match is found you are presumed to be guilty of infringing on their alleged copyright. This is regardless of how the image was actually acquired. Getty then sends you a letter informing you of the page displaying the image, and demands whopping $1000+ settlement per image.

This fee is not their typical license fee of $49-$99, no, no…; this is them claiming statutory damages as if the image was “their registered copyright”. Now just to put this into perspective, IStock photography, another popular photography source, charges only $1 per photo.

The points here to pay attention to are:

1. In many instances you can legally acquire these images from other sources than Getty. The photographers have no allegiance to Getty and will often distribute their works through others without notifying Getty of this.
2. Many of these images are not registered copyrighted works. That means only actual damages can be awarded. (The photographer is responsible for copyrighting the work after which copyright can be transferred to another. In my clients case a search of the copyright database yielded no results for the photographer as the claimant)
3. Finally, Getty in many instances is not the copyright holder and has no claim.

“A copyright owner can only sue for infringement on a work whose copyright was registered with the Copyright Office, and can get statutory damages and attorney's fees only if the copyright registration was filed before infringement or within three months of first publication.”

(17 U.S.C. 411 and 412)

The next, thing I learned is that this is a blanket campaign; it appears that they have notified thousands of potentially legitimate license holders that they are in violation. Why? Easy money, most people are honest and want follow the law, so they just pay it. No research, no due diligence. They assume that it is a legitimate charge and give a sorry, here’s my check. This is similar to The Domain Registry of America, another scam that preys on the “It looks legit, Just Pay It” types.

Others want answers and fight back. Such as Matthew Chan, that has a great website devoted to this scam.

This brings me to the magic number of $1000. Why $1000? Well, it is a highly profitable number for them, and too little for most to people to spend much time fighting. 

Now here are a few things you need to know:

1. This is typically not a “certified” letter; therefore it is not a legal notice.
2. To date, there have not been any court cases.
3. Many letters reference images available in other image collections.
4. Do not contact them until you receive legal notice. It only targets you as someone who they have scared.
5. If you have obtained the images through a legitimate source you should file a complaint with both the Better Business Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission.
6. If you were to go to court, the courts will likely look at Intent and actual damages which could be at most what they charge for the license fee of that image which is typically $49-$99.
7. If you wish to pay and make this go away, be sure to negotiate a settlement, do not pay the whole amount. Typically settlements 10% of the request are the norm.
8. After legal notice, Getty will first need to send proof that they are the license holder and or the actual author / owner of the photo. If they don’t actually have a registered copyright they are not allowed to get the statutory damages that they are asking for in their letter. They are limited to actual damages. The problem for them is that they are going to have to prove that these images were not legally available on other websites. They will have to prove these points before a claim can be made.

In closing, let me state that I am not an attorney; this is not legal advice although some of this information was acquired from attorneys and legal sites. Information found in this post can be readily found on the internet and as always, do your own research.