Re: copyright infringement question


sylvian stone wrote:
OK,

This may seem a bit stupid to some of you, and you may say "I told you
so...etc..etc...", but this is the question:

I receive a letter from a major london solicitor stating that I have
infringed the copyright of one of their clients images on my website
(their 'client' is a large image library).

It basically states that I can pay several thousand pounds within 14
days, or else they will begin proceedings, and I will have to pay many
more thousands of pounds once they instigate proceedings, etc.....

The image in question is a tiny thumbnail (I can't honestly remember
where this came from - I think from some CD or other), and this is an
uterly trivial part of this site.

This is a bit of a shock, as I generate my own content on my own sites,
or get images that I can't create for myself from free stock photo
sites - this obviously slipped 'through the net' at some point, which
is my own stupid fault.

OK, if this is copyrighted, I should remove it - which I did straight
away. But there is a paragraph in the demand stating that if I do this,
I still need to pay anyway, because I have had use of it, etc....

After sitting on this letter for a couple of hours, it kind of smacked
of school playground bully tactics.

The options are A) Pay a ridiculous sum or B) ignore the letter, and
risk paying an even more ridiculous sum, probably a five figure sum.

The fact is that I have made no money from the inadvertant use of their
images, so this seems to me like a bit of a 'fishing expedition'.
However, the letter goes on to state that they "will not enter into
negotiation" because this is their minimum charge.

Basically, I suspect that they are these 'big name' law firms to
intimidate people, for what are quite trivial infingements, into paying
ridiculous fees. Although I suspect that a significant part of this
payment could be probably the lawyers costs anyway....

So... their letter precludes any settlement...but this strikes me as
crazy, as most people involved in litigation are prepared to settle at
some point or another....

Any sensible suggestions ?


Rgds
SS.

Here's what I suggest (I am not a lawyer):
1) Take the image down;

2) Tell them before you even consider paying, they must:
a) Prove a copyrighted image was up on your website;
b) Your liability amounts to thousands of pounds.

3) Do be more careful in the future.

Do not say anything which implicitly indicates that you did have the
copyrighted image on your website. Make them do the legwork.

If they still want to take you to court, tell them you will post up the
court proceedings on your website.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Please help: BER for QPSK in OFDM over Rayleigh matlab code doesnt work.
    ... How much are you willing to pay for getting this job done? ... Just delete me from this website then! ... I am not student. ... Because it shows that you are more stupid. ...
    (comp.dsp)
  • Re: URGENT - Calls for China fur ban as animal cruelty exposed . See the video proof as animals
    ... why would people pay for them? ... for your website, money they'll never see again most likely. ... These cost savings are only possible ... In those days the UK was self sufficient in coal, and the gas ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)
  • Re: Say goodbye to the internet as we know it
    ... You're about to start paying more for the internet. ... get will be a tiered system, like cable television, where you pay extra to ... No longer will you just be able to surf the 'net and go to any website you ... important matter -- a matter some are arguing is the First Amendment issue ...
    (rec.sport.golf)
  • Re: Say goodbye to the internet as we know it
    ... You're about to start paying more for the internet. ... get will be a tiered system, like cable television, where you pay extra to ... No longer will you just be able to surf the 'net and go to any website you ... important matter -- a matter some are arguing is the First Amendment issue ...
    (rec.sport.golf)
  • Re: Would you done such a project?
    ... I'm in touch with a company which wants me to develop a new website for them. ... I've done a project before for them and suddenly in the during development they gave me a new requirement specifications (features not in original spec). ... the new comany is offering to pay me $41 pr hour and they have set a limit of 40 hours they will pay me... ... Unless you have it in writing they cannot change the scope, and you have a scope you can complete in 40 hours, I would say the second word in the two word sentence is OFF. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)