Two of my images have been stolen

Ok so I found a website using an image of mine on their website to promote themselves as a working artist in the music industry. I emailed them and this was the response that I got back.

Anthony

Firstly, I would like to apologise for taking a while to respond. I have been extremely busy and unable to pick up my emails until recently.

There are a few points that I would like to raise with regards to your query;

· The said photograph was made publicly available on Facebook without my consent meaning that people are able to ‘tag’ photographs and use them on their own profile – in which case I doubt you attempt to invoice on these occasions thus making it unreasonable for you to pursue myself;
· There is no contact information nor usage restriction information on the photo itself nor the album in which it was published. Consequently, it would have been impossible to gain the photographer’s prior consent to use the image or to know that there was any restriction on the image’s use at all;
· You proclaim that you are the owner of copy right attached to the said photograph however, I have no proof that you are indeed the photographer who took this picture and therefore whether any copy right is owed to yourself;
· The said photograph is no longer being used on hannahwants.com;
· The amount you have invoiced is wholly disproportionate to the usage of any alleged copy right infringement;
· Finally, this photograph was taken of myself without my consent. I consider it extremely unreasonable that you are demanding payment for a photograph that is of me despite you not having gained my consent to neither taking the photograph nor to then publishing the image on Facebook.

For the above mentioned reasons I am not willing, or indeed in a position, to pay £500 as you have demanded.

Please let me know whether you have any further questions.

Kind regards

H.S



PS. If you wish to take this any further then I will be more than happy to ask my solicitor (who fortunately happens to be a close family member) to write a more legal / professional letter to yourself underlining the relevant issues/laws as to why your demand is so economically ridiculous and would not stand up in court.

PPS. Please do not take any pictures of me in future.

Many Thanks,

H.S





Where do I stand now? Im not very clued up on the legal side of this.

Tony
 
Last edited:
No expert but...

Points 1. I don't fully understand this. Has she ripped the image off your FB account and used it on her website?

2. Is BS. I wouden't use some of her work because it doesent have copyright written on it. CR is implied, if there are no contact details, don't use the photo.

3.You will have to proove. I'm not sure how you could do this. Presumably you have the original somewhere on your HDD.

4. The picture has still has its usage infringed, whether it is displayed on the website or not. However, the fact it has been removed could distabilise your claim as they have acted to resolve the problem.

5. £500 is a lot. I don't know in what way the picture was used or what the going rate is. I would have thought £250 was a more reasonable figure to be honest but if you drop the cost now it would look a bit shifty on your part.

6. If you took the photo in a public place then #6 is bs too. You don't need anyone's permission to shoot in public. Privicy in a public place is not implied. You took the photograph, you are the copyright holder. If she wants to use it, she pays for its use.

This could have been avoided by watermarking your image, even in the bottom left/right corner. Cropping the watermark out would be intent to infringe.

If you want to call her bluf then do so. You could go to a solicitor to see where you stand but then again thats £££'s. There is some good advice on the forum so scout about, also someone more knowlegable than me will probably answer.
 
Last edited:
just a minor point and not relevant, but I hate it when people use 'myself' instead of 'me' and 'yourself' instead of 'you'

they think it makes them sound official and professional, but it doesn't, it makes them sound uneducated.

as for legal position, if you uploaded it to facebook you are still the copy-write owner whether people tag it or not. They can only link back to your page. Plus she was using it for commercial/financial gain which is different. She still needs your permission to use it. And you don't need her permission to take photos of her unless you will make money from them, then you need a model release. However she could argue harassment.

I'm not an expert, this is all my opinion based on stuff I've read
 
I was working in a club (the promoter hired me to take photos) she was doing there on the night. I let the promoters use the images on their Facebook and she then took the images off there.

I did send her a screen shot of the image in use on her website.

I asked A fellow member off here for advice and they checked getty for a similar stock photo and it was somewhere in the region of £815. I was advised that £500 would be reasonable.
 
sturisoma said:
And you don't need her permission to take photos of her unless you will make money from them, then you need a model release.
Click to expand...

Not 100% but i'm fairly certain this is untrue.

She could have a deal with the promoters, you might want to get onto them about it, I don't know.
 
Last edited:
Send her an invoice recorded delivery with 30 days to pay. Advise her to talk to a solicitor before she decides not to pay.
 
duttytd said:
I was working in a club (the promoter hired me to take photos) she was doing there on the night. I let the promoters use the images on their Facebook and she then took the images off there.

I did send her a screen shot of the image in use on her website.

I asked A fellow member off here for advice and they checked getty for a similar stock photo and it was somewhere in the region of £815. I was advised that £500 would be reasonable.
Click to expand...

Jeez dude, you took a picture of a girl in a club, and now you're demanding 500 quid off her because she put it on her website?

I'd say there's bigger battles you could fight, and as someone who has had scores of images stolen and used commercially, I can say that this is incredibly petty.

It's one thing expecting to be paid for your work, but another when you're being completely unreasonable.

Honestly dude, you shot a club night. Get a reputation for being heavy like this, and the chances are, club nights will be the only thing you ever shoot.

Worst part is that you wouldn't even charge the club that to shoot for the whole night, yet you're going to charge an individual trying to make a living what I bet is 5 or more times than the fee you charged the club.

Totally and utterly unreasonable.
 
Last edited:
duttytd said:
Ok so I found a website using an image of mine on their website to promote themselves as a working artist in the music industry. I emailed them and this was the response that I got back.

Anthony

Firstly, I would like to apologise for taking a while to respond. I have been extremely busy and unable to pick up my emails until recently.

There are a few points that I would like to raise with regards to your query;

· The said photograph was made publicly available on Facebook without my consent meaning that people are able to ‘tag’ photographs and use them on their own profile – in which case I doubt you attempt to invoice on these occasions thus making it unreasonable for you to pursue myself;
· There is no contact information nor usage restriction information on the photo itself nor the album in which it was published. Consequently, it would have been impossible to gain the photographer’s prior consent to use the image or to know that there was any restriction on the image’s use at all;
· You proclaim that you are the owner of copy right attached to the said photograph however, I have no proof that you are indeed the photographer who took this picture and therefore whether any copy right is owed to yourself;
· The said photograph is no longer being used on hannahwants.com;
· The amount you have invoiced is wholly disproportionate to the usage of any alleged copy right infringement;
· Finally, this photograph was taken of myself without my consent. I consider it extremely unreasonable that you are demanding payment for a photograph that is of me despite you not having gained my consent to neither taking the photograph nor to then publishing the image on Facebook.

For the above mentioned reasons I am not willing, or indeed in a position, to pay £500 as you have demanded.

Please let me know whether you have any further questions.

Kind regards

Hannah Smith



PS. If you wish to take this any further then I will be more than happy to ask my solicitor (who fortunately happens to be a close family member) to write a more legal / professional letter to yourself underlining the relevant issues/laws as to why your demand is so economically ridiculous and would not stand up in court.

PPS. Please do not take any pictures of me in future.

Many Thanks,

Hannah







Where do I stand now? Im not very clued up on the legal side of this.

Tony
Click to expand...

1. Err so what - you don't need her constant to use it on Facebook.

2. Err so what - its her responsibility to make sure of the copyright status, not yours.

3. Its not unreasonable to request proof of ownership, but presumably you can do so, and if she asks more then once she just looks bad.

4. It up to her if she takes it down and no longer wishes to use or pay for it, it has no effect on this.

5. Its yours to sell, as she's used it without your consent its up to you to charge what you'd like.

6. Assuming you had consent to be wherever you took the photo she has no right to privacy. Her consent is irrelevant,

I wouldn't worry about her bluster about her solicitor. Just reply, politely requesting payment within 28 days or you'll take county court action
 
London Headshots said:
Jeez dude, you took a picture of a girl in a club, and now you're demanding 500 quid off her because she put it on her website?

I'd say there's bigger battles you could fight, and as someone who has had scores of images stolen and used commercially, I can say that this is incredibly petty.

It's one thing expecting to be paid for your work, but another when you're being completely unreasonable.

Honestly dude, you shot a club night. Get a reputation for being heavy like this, and the chances are, club nights will be the only thing you ever shoot.

Just being honest.
Click to expand...

Just because I done a shoot in a night club does not make the fact of that she has done wrong ok.

Almost sounds like your putting me down and saying its ok to steel my images and use them without my permission just because I shoot events...
 
duttytd said:
Just because I done a shoot in a night club does not make the fact of that she has done wrong ok.

Almost sounds like your putting me down and saying its ok to steel my images and use them without my permission just because I shoot events...
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying that you're being incredibly unreasonable, because the fee you charged the club is probably 1/5 of what you are trying to charge an individual.

She was probably completely unaware she needed permission, because having shot for clubs earlier in my career, I can promise you that they will give permission to whoever the hell asks for it, and then deny it later when it comes back and bites them.

Like I say, you should pick your battles.

It's all very well chasing someone who has stolen your work, and it's all very well taking the advise from people on here, but just bare in mind that most of the people who've given the more gung-ho advise have probably never successfully claimed for a copyright infringement in their entire life, and are likely just spouting something they'd read from someone else who hadn't either.

Nothing makes copyright theft OK, but some things mitigate the seriousness of it. In this case the "thief" is the subject of the photo. The "crime" is using it on a website that probably gets monthly traffic barely out of double figures.

And you want £500 for that?

That's a third of what I charged Givenchy to shoot an image for Elle magazine.

It's completely unreasonable.
 
Last edited:
London Headshots said:
No, I'm saying that you're being incredibly unreasonable, because the fee you charged the club is probably 1/5 of what you are trying to charge an individual.

She was probably completely unaware she needed permission, because having shot for clubs earlier in my career, I can promise you that they will give permission to whoever the hell asks for it, and then deny it later when it comes back and bites them.

Like I say, you should pick your battles.

It's all very well chasing someone who has stolen your work, and it's all very well taking the advise from people on here, but just bare in mind that most of the people who've given the more gung-ho advise have probably never successfully claimed for a copyright infringement in their entire life, and are likely just spouting something they'd read from someone else who hadn't either.
Click to expand...

I know the promoter very well and if he had said she could use the image then she would have pointed this out in the email. The point is that I know how much she charges and on her page you can clearly see how many bookings she has and she was using the image to promote her business. There was a watermark at the bottom of the photo and she has cut it off then used it.
 
duttytd said:
I know the promoter very well and if he had said she could use the image then she would have pointed this out in the email. The point is that I know how much she charges and on her page you can clearly see how many bookings she has and she was using the image to promote her business. There was a watermark at the bottom of the photo and she has cut it off then used it.
Click to expand...

OK, I'm not arguing just to be a d*ck. If she's removed the watermark, then that's a different issue. I hate it when people do that. If she's as busy as you say she is, and she's actually promoting a business, then ignore what I said.

Though 500 is still probably too steep, dude. You should charge her what you'd charge to take the shot in a studio.
 
Last edited:
£500 is insanely steep.. you've burned your bridges with that sort of figure. If you started reasonable you might get a negotiation. Go in stupidly high and you'll get written off as a chancer. Hard luck, but I think you've blown this one.
 
I'm not taking it as you being a d*ck. She has removed the watermark and she did know I was the photographer so she could have messaged me and asked... If she had asked I'd have let her use it no problem. Her website promotes her as an artist and is where she gets all her bookings from so in my eyes thats her business. she makes some serious money and the traffic on her site is rather high as she is one of the biggest producers/dj's of that genre of music.

Ok I take it £500 may be a bit steep but its more to the fact that she deceived me and now I'm using my own time to get the money while I could be doing other work.
 
Alastair said:
£500 is insanely steep.. you've burned your bridges with that sort of figure. If you started reasonable you might get a negotiation. Go in stupidly high and you'll get written off as a chancer. Hard luck, but I think you've blown this one.
Click to expand...

Yeah I hear you but I'm still going to peruse it for now and see if I get anywhere.
 
TBH £500 might have been a bit steep, but that's done now. You could justify it as a charge for unauthorised use.

She's in an artistic industry so she can't get away with claims about not really understanding copyright, and she's running a business, selling her talent, and using yours to help her make money. Get her chased, she's definitely trying to scare you off with lawyer talk! You can probably get the webmaster details from a Whois, it's possibly the webmasters liability anyway, as the actual publisher.

I'd probably avoid getting into a discussion now, but if it gets to court you could ask her how she'd have dealt with someone stealing her music. And I'd remove her name from the thread - in case you do have to get legal.
 
Phil V said:
TBH £500 might have been a bit steep, but that's done now. You could justify it as a charge for unauthorised use.

She's in an artistic industry so she can't get away with claims about not really understanding copyright, and she's running a business, selling her talent, and using yours to help her make money. Get her chased, she's definitely trying to scare you off with lawyer talk! You can probably get the webmaster details from a Whois, it's possibly the webmasters liability anyway, as the actual publisher.

I'd probably avoid getting into a discussion now, but if it gets to court you could ask her how she'd have dealt with someone stealing her music. And I'd remove her name from the thread - in case you do have to get legal.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply Phil. Name has now been removed. What would you advise I say I'm my reply to her email?

Tony
 
i wouldnt reply as theres nothing to be gained from getting into an email exchange with her (unless she's fit and you think payment in kind might be an option :naughty: )- just send her an invoice for unauthorised usage and give her 28 days to pay , if she doesnt pay use the quick small claims route to pursue for non payment. - on the invoice i'd break it down as about £150-200 for the image and the rest as an unauthorised usage fee.

And don't be put off by her claim of having a solicitor as a close family member - if that were true they'd have advised as to how the law actually stands and her response to you would not be full of legal errors (they'd also have advised her to make her response to you "without predjudice" which you definitely should do if you do email her again for any reason)
 
There are already some tips above from Hugh, I'm not an expert, there's some IP lawyer links somewhere here.

You need to take a breath and tread carefully, the mistake you made on first contact was following the advice of someone who wasn't an expert, don't consolidate that by rushing in again.

As others have said though, an email won't do, you need an address and to send a registered letter, anything else can legally be ignored. Don't get angry, simply state your case and send an invoice with terms. The unpaid invoice can then become the basis of a court action. An email won't, and an email that says anything that's legally iffy, could put the skids under your case before you start.
 
Phil V said:
There are already some tips above from Hugh, I'm not an expert, there's some IP lawyer links somewhere here.

You need to take a breath and tread carefully, the mistake you made on first contact was following the advice of someone who wasn't an expert, don't consolidate that by rushing in again.

As others have said though, an email won't do, you need an address and to send a registered letter, anything else can legally be ignored. Don't get angry, simply state your case and send an invoice with terms. The unpaid invoice can then become the basis of a court action. An email won't, and an email that says anything that's legally iffy, could put the skids under your case before you start.
Click to expand...

This

I'd imagine your club promoter mate must have an address for her or at least a phone number , i doubt he's going to put on acts he can only contact by email
 
try 192.com for her address
 
trouble with directory enquiries is that its going to be difficult with such a common name.

That said if you've seen her website it ought to be reasonably easy to get her address from the domain registration (unless she was bright enough to use an anonymyser) - pm me the url (dont put it on here) and i'll have a looksee for you
 
big soft moose said:
trouble with directory enquiries is that its going to be difficult with such a common name.

That said if you've seen her website it ought to be reasonably easy to get her address from the domain registration (unless she was bright enough to use an anonymyser) - pm me the url (dont put it on here) and i'll have a looksee for you
Click to expand...

Sent ;)
 
Pm returned ... it was never going to be that easy :lol:

but as i said in the pm if you can't pin an address for her down you could always send your invoice to the guy who owns the domain (who appears to be her web designer)... at the end of the day its technically his site that has infringed your copyright
 
her mobile No is on the web
 
big soft moose said:
just send her an invoice for unauthorised usage and give her 28 days to pay , if she doesnt pay use the quick small claims route to pursue for non payment. - on the invoice i'd break it down as about £150-200 for the image and the rest as an unauthorised usage fee.
Click to expand...

Unauthorised usage fee!... Really? Are you suggesting that an individual is able to fine someone? :thinking: duttytd can only claim for loss and if challenged would have to prove that loss and I would suspect prove that the charge for the shot is reasonable........ £500 is unlikely to be reasonable unless he can show previous sales to that value :thinking:
 
duttytd said:
Just because I done a shoot in a night club does not make the fact of that she has done wrong ok.

Almost sounds like your putting me down and saying its ok to steel my images and use them without my permission just because I shoot events...
Click to expand...

No but asking for £500 for it is just downright stupid - who was the numpty that advised that one lol

I'd review the figure down to around £120 for the unuthorised use etc etc

Sending an email is fine just attach the invoice with a break down of the payment and give her 28 days to pay before you send off to the small claims court. Then if she had not paid after 28 days put in a claim.
 
big soft moose said:
Pm returned ... it was never going to be that easy :lol:

but as i said in the pm if you can't pin an address for her down you could always send your invoice to the guy who owns the domain (who appears to be her web designer)... at the end of the day its technically his site that has infringed your copyright
Click to expand...

Get a mate to call, saying he wants to book her for something or other. Ask for an address so he can send time and location details. :D
 
Last edited:
POAH said:
Sending an email is fine just attach the invoice with a break down of the payment and give her 28 days to pay before you send off to the small claims court. Then if she had not paid after 28 days put in a claim.
Click to expand...

If you do that you'll lose your costs and most likely become liable for hers as well.

Theres a set of guidelines you need to follow before you start court proceedings, and although a judge will forgive you for not following them to the letter if you're representing yourself, most will get really ****ed off if you make no effort to be reasonable and give costs against you even on the small claims track. Send a 28 day after your invoice has expired giving notice of court action.

BTW - there is no 'small claims court' in the UK.
 
Just a quick question to you guys that send out invoices.
What style of invoice do you use and how do you calculate your costs on both usage and lack of license to use?
 
POAH said:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/ManagingDebt/Makingacourtclaimformoney/DG_195812


pretty sure it says court, judge and hearing on that page :lol:
Click to expand...

yes - you'll notice (when you read it properly) it has 'small claims hearings', not 'small claims court'. Thats a big difference on one word.

Purely for the record there are three tracks within the county court, which is where you issue summons for and cases are heard. A judge decides (not you, although your allocation forms do influence) based on value of claim, your comments and other factors if it goes to the small claims track, fast track, or multi track. He can also kick it up to a higher court should he have good reason for doing so. It explains all this on that page if it had held you attention long enough

Which track it goes on also decides costs liability as well.

See the difference? :cool:
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
yes - you'll notice (when you read it properly) it has 'small claims hearings', not 'small claims court'. Thats a big difference on one word.

Purely for the record there are three tracks within the county court, which is where you issue summons for and cases are heard. A judge decides (not you, although your allocation forms do influence) based on value of claim, your comments and other factors if it goes to the small claims track, fast track, or multi track. He can also kick it up to a higher court should he have good reason for doing so. It explains all this on that page if it had held you attention long enough

Which track it goes on also decides costs liability as well.

See the difference? :cool:
Click to expand...

TBF it's different in Scotland than England and Wales but the fact is you still go to court for your claim hence the term. I am fully aware there is not a special court for small claims
 
Last edited:
stupar said:
Just a quick question to you guys that send out invoices.
What style of invoice do you use and how do you calculate your costs on both usage and lack of license to use?
Click to expand...

I summarised my invoice layout in post #33 (you'll need to vary the line item description to suit). I take usage rates from the freelancer guide.


But whatever you do, don't make-up a stupidly high figure (eg. £500) and don't make-up claims that you can't justify ("unauthorised usage fee") or will get you taken for an idiot because the have no relevance ("damages").

And don't engage in moral debate on the phone, by email or letter. Just find out who the invoice needs to go to and send it. Start arguing and you'll lose credibility. If you're credible and professional in your approach you are far more likely to get paid what you want.
 
getty, alamy etc make a charge for unauthorised usage - and usually make it stick , its not damages its saying had you asked i would have charge X , but as you didn't i'm going to charge Y .

I agree 500 sounds high for an individual, but as this girl used tony's picture to promote her business , and from what he says her business is doing pretty well , you've got to look at it in business terms , and 500 is a perfectly reasonable ask for a business that has infringed your copyright. (especially bearing in mind that it was two photos so thats only 250 notes per photo)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top