The real cost of being sued by Getty
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: I'm so proud, I weaned someone off a P&S to a DSLR!
Next: |GG| One more nail in the optical viewfinder coffin
From: Ray Fischer on 19 Oct 2009 23:41 Eric Stevens <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote: >On 18 Oct 2009 18:00:22 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >>NotMe <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message >>>: Twibil <nowayjose6(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>: >On Oct 17, 4:17 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>: >> >>>: >> >>>: >> >The fines only seem ridiculous to the thief. >>>: >> >>>: >> Demanding 10 times the usual fee for a low-res version of the >>>licensable >>>: >> photo isn't ridiculous? >>>: > >>>: >Hmmm. So you think that the thief -or you- should be able to set the >>>: >value of an item, and the actual owner shouldn't. >>>: >>>: The actual owner HAS set a value. They demand far more. It looks >>>: like about ten times what the usual licensing fee might be. >>> >>>Which is quiet typical for any civil court case. One party asks for more >>>(sometimes the moon) the other party ask for less usually nothing. The >>>court makes a judgment on what equitable. >> >>"I you don't give us ten times what we charge for the photo then we'll >>screw you over for 200 times what the photo is worth." >> >>But that's what happens when law triumphs over justice. > >The more you write, the more you sound like a self-righteous thief. The more you write the more you sound like an immoral goose-stepping fascist. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Ray Fischer on 20 Oct 2009 00:09 Eric Stevens <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote: >On 17 Oct 2009 23:17:03 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >>Eric Stevens <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote: >>>On 17 Oct 2009 16:54:15 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>> >>>>Alfred Molon <alfred_molon(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> Ray Fischer >>>> >>>>>> A good reason to avoid Getty like the plague. >>>>> >>>>>A good reason not to steal images. >>>> >>>>When a company uses that as an excuse to extort ridiculous fines from >>>>people to employ lawyers then it's a good reason not to do business >>>>with them. >>> >>>The fines only seem ridiculous to the thief. >> >>Demanding 10 times the usual fee for a low-res version of the licensable >>photo isn't ridiculous? > >Not when the guy tried to steal it for nothing. It must make it very easy for simple people like you to simply assume that other people are guilty. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Eric Stevens on 20 Oct 2009 00:11 On 20 Oct 2009 03:40:08 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >Eric Stevens <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote: >>rOn 18 Oct 2009 07:33:07 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >>>NotMe <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>>In my experience none of the judgments I've encounter (we prevailed) for >>>>copyright infringement were listed a fines. These are judgments basically >>>>for damages plus court cost and legal fees. >>> >>>It looks to me like it's well past damages and into punitive >>>maliciousness. >> >>'Punitive' is exactly the right word. It's to punish the thief for >>stealing. > >By chopping off their hands. Much better than chopping off their heads. Eric Stevens
From: Eric Stevens on 20 Oct 2009 00:12 On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 03:52:33 -0700 (PDT), sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On 19 okt, 10:26, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote: >> On 18 Oct 2009 18:00:22 GMT, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >NotMe <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: >> >>"Ray Fischer" <rfisc...(a)sonic.net> wrote in message >> >>: Twibil �<nowayjo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>: >On Oct 17, 4:17 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >>: >> >> >>: >> >> >>: >> >The fines only seem ridiculous to the thief. >> >>: >> >> >>: >> Demanding 10 times the usual fee for a low-res version of the >> >>licensable >> >>: >> photo isn't ridiculous? >> >>: > >> >>: >Hmmm. �So you think that the thief -or you- should be able to set the >> >>: >value of an item, and the actual owner shouldn't. >> >>: >> >>: The actual owner HAS set a value. �They demand far more. �It looks >> >>: like about ten times what the usual licensing fee might be. >> >> >>Which is quiet typical for any civil court case. �One party asks for more >> >>(sometimes the moon) the other party ask for less usually nothing. � The >> >>court makes a judgment on what equitable. >> >> >"I you don't give us ten times what we charge for the photo then we'll >> >screw you over for 200 times what the photo is worth." >> >> >But that's what happens when law triumphs over justice. >> >> The more you write, the more you sound like a self-righteous thief. >> >> Eric Stevens > >You sound like a fascist cockroach. Calling me names will not alter the situation. Eric Stevens
From: Eric Stevens on 20 Oct 2009 00:13
On 20 Oct 2009 03:41:57 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >Eric Stevens <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote: >>On 18 Oct 2009 18:00:22 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >>>NotMe <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message >>>>: Twibil <nowayjose6(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>: >On Oct 17, 4:17 pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>>>: >> >>>>: >> >>>>: >> >The fines only seem ridiculous to the thief. >>>>: >> >>>>: >> Demanding 10 times the usual fee for a low-res version of the >>>>licensable >>>>: >> photo isn't ridiculous? >>>>: > >>>>: >Hmmm. So you think that the thief -or you- should be able to set the >>>>: >value of an item, and the actual owner shouldn't. >>>>: >>>>: The actual owner HAS set a value. They demand far more. It looks >>>>: like about ten times what the usual licensing fee might be. >>>> >>>>Which is quiet typical for any civil court case. One party asks for more >>>>(sometimes the moon) the other party ask for less usually nothing. The >>>>court makes a judgment on what equitable. >>> >>>"I you don't give us ten times what we charge for the photo then we'll >>>screw you over for 200 times what the photo is worth." >>> >>>But that's what happens when law triumphs over justice. >> >>The more you write, the more you sound like a self-righteous thief. > >The more you write the more you sound like an immoral goose-stepping >fascist. Calling me names will not make you sound any less of a thief. Eric Stevens |