Copyrighted images on website: HELP needed

[Artois]

My work has been using a few images on their website for a number of years, which our website designer found on google image search.


Today, we have received a letter from Getty Images, stating that the images are their property and that we must pay them £11,515!

Obviously we have removed them the moment we got this letter, but does anyone know the legal implications of our predicament?

Are we liable?

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[glasfryn]

might be worth checking this out,could be a scam.

is there anyones name on these images.
if theres not how are you to know.

 

[robbied69]

Have a read of this

http://www.bambooweb.com/articles/c/o/Copyright_Law.html

pretty interesting.

 

[Grendel]

If the image hasn't got "Copyright © 2006 Getty Images" or something similar on it, then tell them to bugger off.

 

[Deano's Right Foot]

I work with copyright issues (although music copyrights rather than images) but if you have used copyrights without permission then yes you are liable. And using them in an advertising or marketing context pushes the price up.

A company like Getty are not going to be too forgiving but my advice would be to reply promptly, be honest, apologetic and courteous and make a realisitic offer (£5k?). I wouldn't get lawyers involved, because they may well end up costing more than what they are asking for.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

Where do they get the figure of £11,515 from?

 

[Artois]

Where do they get the figure of £11,515 from?

4 x £1,250 + VAT
3 x £1,600 + VAT

 

[Artois]

I work with copyright issues (although music copyrights rather than images) but if you have used copyrights without permission then yes you are liable. And using them in an advertising or marketing context pushes the price up.

A company like Getty are not going to be too forgiving but my advice would be to reply promptly, be honest, apologetic and courteous and make a realisitic offer (£5k?). I wouldn't get lawyers involved, because they may well end up costing more than what they are asking for.

Oh dear.

 

[eastlondonseagull]

My work has been using a few images on their website for a number of years, which our website designer found on google image search.


Today, we have received a letter from Getty Images, stating that the images are their property and that we must pay them £11,515!

Obviously we have removed them the moment we got this letter, but does anyone know the legal implications of our predicament?

Are we liable?

Any help would be appreciated.

I used to do spells editing the Zoo Weekly website and kids were always posting copyrighted pics from The Sun etc on the message boards. We got a few threatening legal messages through from Murdoch's lot, but we were always ok just by grovelling and removing them from the site. It was a big job, but as yet we've not been forced to cough up a penny.

 

[aftershavedave]

i'm with deano here, and indeed know getty images fairly well professionally. their business is to licence the use of images and i'd be very surprised if they weren't properly labelled.

i think you have a little problem....

 

[Deano's Right Foot]

Also check any written agreement that you had with the web designer.

A good agreement will give you an indemnity against such copyright infringements, so if Getty sue you, you can sue your web designer.

Also be worth getting someone to go to Getty and ask for a quote to use a similar range of images for a similar use, to see if they charge a similar amount as they are charging you. Although invariable they would charge more if permission hadn't been sought before the use.

 

[looney]

There are exemptions to copyright law, ie humour or educational purposes.

Usually copyright law looks for remedies rather than damages and the amount they could claim relates more to how much you have made from them rather than what they perceive them to be worth.

If you contact the DTI they will send you free info on your legal standing. Its a good read.

Btw
If you have been using a trademark you could be in deep shit as thats under trademark law and costs £200 pound to register.

Whats your site about?

 

[Wozza]

My work has been using a few images on their website for a number of years, which our website designer found on google image search.

What a numpty. Any professional designer should know that you don't steal media* and use it in a commercial context. Honestly, that's week one, day one stuff.

If he's an employee he should be sacked for gross misconduct.

If he's a freelancer, you could probably sue him. Unless someone signed off the image use of course...

* And it makes absolutely NO difference if it has a copyright message/symbol or not.

 

[Wozza]

Re: Re: Copyrighted images on website: HELP needed

I used to do spells editing the Zoo Weekly website and kids were always posting copyrighted pics from The Sun etc on the message boards. We got a few threatening legal messages through from Murdoch's lot, but we were always ok just by grovelling and removing them from the site. It was a big job, but as yet we've not been forced to cough up a penny.

That's rather different Tim.

As Afters says, licensing images is Getty's BUSINESS - and a very big one at that.

They probably make a sizeable percentage of their profits from suing people for misuse.

 

[Biscuit]

If the image hasn't got "Copyright © 2006 Getty Images" or something similar on it, then tell them to bugger off.

Thats not true.

If you were to write or draw something origional etc then you would automatically own the copyright. The use of a © symbol or phrase is just a gentle reminder of that.

 

[Cian]

Additionally, its entirely possible for something you can freely use to have copyright information embedded in the image, or in metadata - all "free software" is copyright, for instance.

 

[The Large One]

If the images are from Getty, then how would he manage to get them in the first place without paying for them?

I use Getty, and you first download the thumbail/preview into your lightbox, then 'negotiate' a fee for usage. Depending on what the image is used for will determine the price. My point is, I though all the Getty previews had their ident watermarked into them.

From what you're saying Martin, the web designer needs a kick up the arse for swiping the images without coughing up in the first place, and your firm possibly should have kept a tighter rein on him. Unless of course, he didn't tell you there was a cost implication, in which case, kick him up the arse again.

Having said that, ASSUMING those images are Getty's copyright, every time I have dealt them, I have always been able to haggle - so this apparent f*** up needn't cost all £11k. But you might be in for a nasty bill anyway. And on the look-out for a new web designer.

Next time, it may be worth getting your lifestyle images from here. It's MUCH cheaper. www.istockphoto.com

 

[Wozza]

If the images are from Getty, then how would he manage to get them in the first place without paying for them?

I use Getty, and you first download the thumbail/preview into your lightbox, then 'negotiate' a fee for usage. Depending on what the image is used for will determine the price. My point is, I though all the Getty previews had their ident watermarked into them.

Somebody has probably paid for it and then used it online - which the designer found with Google.

 

[London Irish]

I work with copyright issues (although music copyrights rather than images) but if you have used copyrights without permission then yes you are liable. And using them in an advertising or marketing context pushes the price up.

A company like Getty are not going to be too forgiving but my advice would be to reply promptly, be honest, apologetic and courteous and make a realisitic offer (£5k?). I wouldn't get lawyers involved, because they may well end up costing more than what they are asking for.

Excellent advice, Getty are a very professional and reputed company. As Wozza implies, Artois's company must have employed the Richie Morris of website design

 

[Theatre of Trees]

As Wozza implies, Artois's company must have employed the Richie Morris of website design

Wasn't this website completed though?