Being sued for copyright infringement

[sparrowfire]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hello,
I am being threatened with copyright infringement for stock photos on my website. My website was created by a friend 6 years ago using photos he'd purchased. This company is saying the these photos were stolen and are requesting $22,080 from me for retroactive use or else they will sue me for $30,000. I have no proof that these photos were purchased since the web developer now lives in a foreign country and I have no way of contacting him. Being that stock photos cost only $5 - $25 to purchase leaves me wondering why I'm being asked for so much money. I've explained that the pictures were purchased legally and although I never received a cease and desist I chose to shut down my website nonetheless. Any suggestions on what I can do at this point?
Thank you.

 

[quincy]

One suggestion is to consult with an attorney in your area.

Innocent infringement is still infringement so, whether you believed you legally purchased the rights to use the images or not, you can be held legally liable for the illegal use of them. Should you, in fact, be sued, your "innocent" use of the images may result in a court deciding that no damages should be awarded to the copyright owner, as long as you have already removed the images from your website. Then again, a court may award the legitimate copyright owner the damages the owner is seeking and is entitled to under the law.

As for what you paid for the items and the amount of money being requested by the copyright owner, the owner of the rights has the legal right to pursue an infringer for any profits realized by the infringer OR, if the images are registered images, the owner of the rights can collect statutory damages without any proof of harm having resulted from the illegal use of the images.

Statutory damages awarded may be from $750 to $30,000 per infringement, depending on the circumstances - although, as I said earlier, a court may award nothing or as little as $200 if the infringement is determined to be innocent.

It's a crap shoot. You can wait to be sued, try to negotiate a more reasonable settlement with the copyright owner, consult with an attorney to determine your best course of action. . . . .

And, should you be sued and/or find yourself having to pay for the use of the images, you can always try to sue the person who sold you the images, to recover your losses (although if he is out of the country or otherwise unreachable, this may be difficult).

Good luck.

 

[sparrowfire]

Thank you so much for your advice. I just noticed that 2 of the images, out of 4 were licensed by this company two years after I created my website. Is there anyway to prove this and would it matter?

 

[justalayman]

Statutory damages awarded may be from $750 to $30,000 per infringement, depending on the circumstances - although, as I said earlier, a court may award nothing or as little as $200 if the infringement is determined to be innocent.

question for my sinkhole of knowledge if I may.

are statutory damages allowed if the copyright was not registered? or would they be limited to actual damages or am I thinking about the wrong area of IP law altogether?

 

[justalayman]

Thank you so much for your advice. I just noticed that 2 of the images, out of 4 were licensed by this company two years after I created my website. Is there anyway to prove this and would it matter?

licensed to the entity suing you?

You would have to know what the licensing agreement with the copyright owner allowed them in terms of rights and control.

 

[sparrowfire]

If I had already started using the images before the company, who's suing me got the rights to them, how could they sue me? Stock photos would constantly need to be bought over and over again, right? The concept of "buying" them would hold no weight.

 

[justalayman]

sparrowfire;2673047]If I had already started using the images before the company, who's suing me got the rights to them, how could they sue me?

if their licensing agreement gave them all rights of the copyright owner, they would have the same rights as the actual owner. If so and the actual copyright owner would have the right to sue, then these folks would then have that right.

Stock photos would constantly need to be bought over and over again, right?

Not sure what you are asking. What proof do you have that these are even stock photo's that were legally licensed to you? There are a lot of cases where people simply took photos from a site and used them without any legal right to do so. There are also people that claimed to have copyrights and licensed photos to unsuspecting people. The world of the internet has made such theft very easy.

The concept of "buying" them would hold no weight

.sure it would but what rights you bought vary. When you buy a photo to use, you are buying a license for whatever you contracted for. If you use the photo outside of that contract, you are infringing on the copyright even though you had a license to use the photo for some other purpose.

what the other parties license includes is important in attempting to determine what, if any, rights they have concerning the photo's and what, if any, right they have to demand compensation from you.

 

[quincy]

justalayman, you are thinking of the right area of IP law .

If the works are registered before they have been infringed or within three months of first publication of the works, then the holder of the rights may collect statutory damages. If not registered, then the copyright holder is limited to actual damages (any losses suffered) or to any profits realized by the infringer.

 

[Dave1952]

I'm not very comfortable with IP law but I'm puzzled as to why you think that owning stock photos gives you the right to digitize and publish them on the internet. I suspect that you are in the wrong.
I'd urge you to stop showing these photos until you have consulted with an attorney.

Good luck

 

[roger_h]

As someone who licenses image for commercial use (and has had them used without permission) please keep in mind that the company which sells the stock images are going to try and get the most out of you that they can. I believe companies threaten massive amounts on the hopes they'll be able to get about about 10% of what they ask for.

I've tangled with Getty images and some of their photographers too. Generally if you're able to either give them *some* money or maneuver enough to not make suing you worth their while this will not be a problem. Whatever you do, don't sign anything or make any agreements with this company. I would, however, immediately remove any and all images in question and consult an attorney. IMO you will owe them some money, but $30,000 is an absurd amount that they know they will never get.