Catalyst Complaint Cover Page

399039

Complaint
Number 399039 Date 12/7/2011 Status Assignee Actual Savings Amount Disputed Estimated Savings Closed Holbrook, Ruth E $780.00 $780.00 $0.00

Location Bellingham - Consumer Protection Division NAICS 541920-Photographic Services

Complainant
Name Lois E Roberts 47 Donley Dr Rome, GA 30165 Phone Day (706) 235-2885 Phone Evening Email (706) 235-2885 rlois59@gmail.com

Respondent(s)
Name Getty Images 605 5th Ave S Ste 400 Seattle, WA 98104 Contact Phone (206) 925-6753 Toll Free Email copyright.complian ce@gettyimages.co m

Referral(s)
Name Contact Phone Contact Phone Email

Practice(s)
Code 019 Practice Inadequate Disclosure

Activities
Date Added 12/7/2011 12/8/2011 12/8/2011 12/22/2011 Activity Type Request for Review Email to Respondent Email to Complainant Email from Respondent Activity do we want/need process instructions for this R for this scenario? R First Letter to Respondent To: licensecompliance@gettyimages.com C First Letter to Consumer To: rlois59@gmail.com

399039

1 of 2

RK-00505 PRR-2012-00283

Catalyst Report
Complaint Description
Description I own a small internet business. I sell several different item, some I keep in stock and some I drop ship. When I was building my website I was told by my coaches that I had to make sure I got permission from other site to use their images when I sold their products. I did that with all of my images. One of the product I sell had given me permission to use any of their images. I have this in writing. I had one of the images on a secondary page of my site. To my shock I got a legal looking letter in the mail informing me that the image was one of theirs and I had infringed on the copyrite and owed them close to $780.00 I was in shock. I immediately took the image off my site and called to explain that I was given permission from the Company to use their image. They did not care they said I had to pay. This amount of money will destroy my business. I reponded with a registered letter explaining an assuring them I had taken the image down immediately. After examineing the image I had on my site next to the one they said I copied they were not the same. There were several noticible differences which I pointed out to them in the letter. I fully explained that I did not knowingly use a image that I was not supposed to. Anyone looking at the images would be able to see the differences. I assured tham that I had ceased to use the image and would not ever use it again. I did not hear from them again for 2 months. Today I got another letter demanding that I pay the same amount or they will take further action. I don't think they even read my letter. I do not have this kind of money and I did nothing wrong knowingly and I do not beleive the picture is the same. There are too many differences. I also found almost the same picture on another image site for around $5.00. The picture was not on the site that long and I never made any money from it. I have found out they have done this many many times before, and there are a lot of similar complaints against them. Is there not some way to stop them. I can not pay this kind of my money and do not feel like I owe it to them. This would destroy my business. I do understand that there are people out there that would intentionally steal and use copyrighted images but believe me I am not one of them. The image I used did not have a copyrighted watermark on it. If it had I would not have ever used it. There are such noticible differences in the images that I truly do not believe that it is the same image. I in good faith removed the image and took the time to write a letter of explaining my situation to them. It is my hope that we can all move forward with this unfortunate incident peacefully. I am hopeful that we can both act with professional courtesy and consider this matter closed.. Expected resolution details: . The image I used did not have a copyrighted watermark on it. If it had I would not have ever used it. There are such noticeable differences in the images that I truly do not believe that it is the same image. I in good faith removed the image and to

RK-00507 PRR-2012-00283

AdaS

12/22/2011

From: Cynthia Sharp [mailto:Cynthia.Sharp@gettyimages.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 5:52 PM To: ATG MI Bellingham CRC Subject: Re: 399039 : A notice from the Washington State Attorney General'sOffice 1115363 Lois Roberts

Cynthia Sharp Paralegal 605 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 400, Seattle, Washington 98104 Tel 206 925 5000 Fax 206 925 5001 www.gettyimages.com Phone: 206/925.6753 Fax: 206/925.5623 Email: Cynthia.sharp@gettyimages.com December 21, 2011 Via e-mail to BelCRC@atg.wa.gov Ruth E. Holbrook Program Specialist 3 Attorney General of Washington Consumer Protection Division 103 East Holly Street, Suite 308 Bellingham, WA 98225-4310 (360) 738-6187 Re: Lois Roberts, Your File Number: 399039 Our File Number: 1115363

Dear Ms. Holbrook: We are in receipt of the complaint filed by Lois Roberts that you forwarded to us on December 8, 2011. We appreciate the opportunity to respond to Ms. Robertss concerns. By way of introduction, Getty Images is the leading creator and distributor of still and moving images. More than 4,000 images per day are licensed on our website, www.gettyimages.com, which features wholly-owned content (i.e., images to which we own the copyright), as well as exclusively licensed content (i.e., third-party contributor images which are licensed exclusively through us). Customers such as graphic designers, advertising agencies, and publishers license our imagery for a variety of purposes, including but not limited to print advertising, billboards,
399039

RK-00515 PRR-2012-00283

newspaper and magazine articles, brochures and websites. Our license information is clearly available from each page of our website, and customers are not permitted to use imagery without agreeing to a license. Notwithstanding the license requirement, like other digital media companies, Getty Images does fall victim to individuals pirating its intellectual property. To combat this, Getty Images uses both employees and digital image recognition software to locate companies that have used Getty Images imagery without paying a license fee, much akin to pirating music. One such company that recently was identified as having used unlicensed imagery from our collections is Ms. Robertss company, Yee Ha Line Dance Duds (Yee Ha). On September 8, 2011, and again on November 11, we sent Yee Ha a letter with notification that we had found unauthorized use of one of our images on its website, www.linedanceclothingandgear.com. The image is part of Getty Images Rights-Managed Stone collection, #BC0763-001 (the Image), and can be found on our web site at http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/BC0763-001/Stone . We informed Yee Ha that use of the Image without a license constitutes copyright infringement, and that Yee Ha must either (i) provide evidence that a license was issued, or (ii) pay a fee for use of the Image. In this instance, the fee was $780.00, and we provided an invoice in that amount, which featured a thumbnail of the image and its image number, along with a screenshot of the Image on Yee Has website. The amount invoiced is in line with what typically would be charged for a license of the Image under these circumstances. We appreciate that Ms. Roberts promptly removed the Image from the Yee Ha website upon receipt of our letter. However, the Image is protected by copyright, and was previously displayed on that website. Copyright law holds responsible anyone who publicly displays an image without authorization of the copyright holder. We do not doubt Ms. Roberts statement that she acquired the Image from Oak Tree Farms, a web site company, and we suggested she speak with them regarding the situation. As the end user of Getty Images imagery, however, Yee Ha is ultimately responsible for ensuring that it has obtained the appropriate rights to use the imagery. The use of the Image without a license constitutes copyright infringement, for which we are entitled to seek damages. At this time, Ms. Roberts has not raised any valid defenses. However, we intend to continue to work with Ms. Roberts to resolve this matter amicably and fairly. Getty Images has acted appropriately and in good faith in pursuing the unauthorized use of our intellectual property. Should you require any additional information about this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Cynthia Sharp Cynthia Sharp Paralegal
399039

RK-00516 PRR-2012-00283

AdaS

1/10/2012

From: lois roberts [mailto:rlois59@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 6:08 PM To: ATG MI Bellingham CRC Subject: Re: 399039 : A notice from the Washington State Attorney General's Office Thank you so much for your help in this matter. I just wanted to let you know after your correspondence with Getty Images, I was finally contacted by one of there representatives and got a chance to send some information about my side of the case to them. On January 6, 2012 I was contacted by David Wojtczak who was very nice and very professional. He stated that since I had promptly taken the image in question from my site that Getty Images had closed the case against me. I have sent you a link to the letter I received from Getty Images closing the case, for your files. I am very satisfied with the outcome of this case and would like to thank you and Getty images for the co-operation and assistants in this matter. Thank you for your help, Lois Roberts Yee Ha Line Dance Duds

399039

RK-00523 PRR-2012-00283

RuthH

1/10/2012

Csup Closing Adjusted Compainant Notified Us To: rlois59@gmail.com ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Consumer Protection Division 103 East Holly Street, Suite 308 Bellingham, WA 98225-4310 (360) 738-6187 January 10, 2012 Lois E Roberts 47 Donley Dr Rome, GA 30165 RE: Getty Images File #: 399039 Dear Lois E Roberts: Thank you for informing our office that your complaint against Getty Images has been resolved to your satisfaction. Your complaint will remain as part of our public record of the firms business practices. We are happy to hear that our office was able to be of service to you.

RUTH E. HOLBROOK Program Specialist 3 Consumer Protection Division (360) 738-6188 Fax: (360) 738-6190 belcrc@atg.wa.gov

399039

RK-00525 PRR-2012-00283

RK-00526 PRR-2012-00283

RK-00527 PRR-2012-00283

September 21, 2011 Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA Reference #: 7179568 Case #: 1115363 Dear Getty Images, I am writing this letter in response to the letter I received from your company in regards to an allegedly infringing image on one of my product pages of my website. Your letter states that this image is the property of Travelpix Ltd. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I had absolutely no knowledge of this image was not for use. I would never infringe on anyones property without permission knowingly. I wholeheartedly apologize for this unfortunate circumstance. It was a complete shock and very upsetting to me upon receiving this letter. I want you to know that the image was immediately taken off my website. It was located on a secondary page of the site, and has been removed. When building my website the information I was given was that I needed to get permission from the companies that I buy and dropship my products from, to use their images. I have done that with every company I deal with. I was given permission to use all of the images from the company for which this image was on their product page. I did so thinking I had done everything I needed to do. This image was on one of their pages in their site. *I would like to bring it to your attention that he image on my page that you sent me a blowup of is not like the image on your website that you said I infringed on. If you will notice the clouds behind the tree are different. In my picture there are only a few clouds right directly behind the tree that do not touch the ground and then the sky turn totally blue as you look away from the tree to your left. The clouds in your image on your site go from the tree all the way across the picture on the left and touch the ground, they also go up to the sky at the top of your tree, and they do not do this on my image. Also the ground slopes into the tree from the left. In your image the ground slopes away from the tree on the left and into the tree on the right. The grass is very different under the trees. On your image it very thick and very green, on the picture from my site in is a lot more sparse and browner in color. Also if you look at the bottom of the tree on your image there are a lot of little limbs and leaves hanging under the tree. These are not present in my picture. There are other differences I could point out to you also like a fence that is in front of the tree. These are just the major differences there are more.

RK-00528 PRR-2012-00283