A Business Warning For Those Who Use Images
January 30th, 2007 | Michael Pink
I just had a rather painful experience with Getty Images. They are a clearing house of sorts for pictures to be used for promotional purposes. We have purchased images from them in the past, but we used one picture on a secondary page of our website that, although we understood it to be “royalty free,” apparently did not mean we could use it free of charge.
It was an honest mistake on our part, but yesterday, we received a letter from their license compliance department making a “Settlement Demand” to the tune of $1,000 and in order to continue using the image, we would have to essentially rent it for hundreds of dollars more per year. Though it had only been on our site for a few months they felt violated. Well, I can certainly understand the need for copyrights and I support the artist’s right to charge for use of their images, songs or messages and I called them to make things right.
What I am warning you about is the heavy handed response I received from Getty Images. After explaining we were one of their paying customers who thought we had downloaded a “royalty free” image, I offered to pay up front for 2 years usage ($600) and even backdate the agreement to the month we first used the image. They wouldn’t consider it. They didn’t allow us to make it right. They wanted to ding us for $1,000 and then still ask for our business. Guess again. I did settle payment with them because I was in error, but I can’t imagine treating my customers like that. Can you? We removed the image from our website – and their name from our Rolodex.
It reminded me of a buffet my wife and I ate at recently. When I walked into the restaurant, I saw the nice spread of food and asked the price for the buffet. I was told $29 which seemed reasonable for what was offered and we never even looked at the menu. When our check came it was for an extra $8 for two desserts. When I questioned the extra charge for the two desserts, which were with the other food on the buffet, I was told they weren’t included in the price and if I had read the small print on the menu, I would have known that. I paid the $8, but have not bought another meal there. I just don’t get their thinking. It seems so short sighted!
To me, Getty Images is just another reminder of wolf-like business practices we need to be aware of so we can be forewarned, wise as serpents and harmless as doves being preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Digg This Share This
January 30th, 2007 at 7:30 am
This also should serve as a warning for us that re-use of info on the internet is not free.
I had copied an article onto my blog and then gave the writer credit. He found out about it and wanted it removed or paid for. We had a long discussion and he enlightened me on internet copywrite laws. he framed his argument around the fact that posting an article onto your website or blog is similar to taking a book, photocopying it and handing it our to thousands of people.
He was ok with me having a direct link to his page with the article as he was given clearer credit and his advertisers benefited.
As he stated, he gets paid for his ability to put words together in a meaningful way. When he doesn’t get paid he is being robbed.
It gets me thinking how many times do I shortcut others to save a buck or two. This robs them of a blessing from God and sets the stage for me to receive the same…
January 30th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Thanks for the information and I appreciate the way you handled yourself. It appears that Getty charged you “because they could” , probably a common “wolf” practice.
Word of mouth can be the best form of advertisement….OR THE WORST!!
January 30th, 2007 at 7:39 am
Micheal, I am a bit surprised by your post. While I understand you need to inform others of bad business practices, your email comes accross as petty. Where is the forgiveness? Who is in the wrong now? The company that was simply enforcing thier copyright laws, and protections, or you for being hot headed and posting to the entire country because you feel you have been wronged. The only one I see here that is in the wrong is you. Sorry but that is how I see it. Given some time to meditate and pray about what happened, I think you probably would not have made this post. It has done nothing for your credability as a servant of God, who not only talks the talk, but walks the walk.
January 30th, 2007 at 7:54 am
In response to your bad experiences, I thought I would tell a good one and show how it is supposed to be done.
I love Clarks Air Cushion shoes. They feel right and I%u2019ve told people about them for years. The last pair had the stitching come apart after (4 years). I took them to a shoe repair and they said it wasn%u2019t repairable.
I emailed Clarks, explained the problem (and the age) of the shoes.
They emailed me back with a Customer Service number to call. I called it and not only did they replace the shoes, they were OVERNIGHT SHIPPED to me via UPS.
What kind of effect did that have on me? Well, I am writing this and that tells the story.
Next time you need shoes, try Clarks.
Thanks, Keith
www.KeithShamblin.com
We are here to help!
888 725-6798
January 30th, 2007 at 7:59 am
How about the State of Florida penalizing me $50 plus interest for a $28 arithmetic error on my Sales Tax Return? The Big Bad Brother spirit is widespread in our society now. Don’t go there — just pray for them!
January 30th, 2007 at 8:06 am
Royalty free bank images are really tough. It always sounds strange that they don’t think of bad word of mouth, especially if the “customer” has a huge newsletter (or blog).
I just googled “Getty Image infringement” and get 88K results … from US, Israel, France, UK, everywhere. Some of them are close to scam, because it’s third parties who contact you: email on their letter is something like 4453524424@gettimage.com (and it’s not a valid email).
When some victims called gettyimage, a real rep. proposed to lower the fine to 25% of the first statement … well if they issued it!
Note for everyone, 2 things:
if your website is non commercial, you don’t have to pay according to their contract (byt the way, you may even didn’t red the contract).
if someone UPLOAD on avatar coming from a getty image picture on your website (if you have a forum, …), you’re also in trouble and you’ll have to prove that YOU didn’t do it and took every legal way to restrain it.
—
Why I say this?
Looks like some third party businesses uploaded it on some potential victim websites to ask them for money afterward … in the name of getty image!
Getty image strategy may be:
Get third parties to track copyright infringment byt EVERY means (in the last case by creating infringment). Let them ask for money, if victim call us, we play the good guys and propose a rebate!
You become their “customer” through infringment …
Finally, just a link to help you get images, brothers in Christ:
http://www.sxc.hu/
January 30th, 2007 at 8:42 am
There are LEGITIMATE ways to ensure that licenses are properly purchased for images that require it and many other sites use them. For example: images have watermarks on them, words written across them or they simply won’t download at all until you purchase the proper license. That makes it very clear to the consumer when payment is expected and when it’s not. A company that is in the business of selling and distributing images should not make it a practice to allow images to be downloaded for free, even though a fee is required, and then hunt the person down months later with an infringement charge. We spent hundreds of dollars buying images that appeared to require a fee. This particular image did not appear to require one.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:54 am
Mark, I regret that the email came across as petty to you. Just because I have forgiven their conduct doesn’t mean I endorse it. It was bad enough in my opinion to warn others. You might remember Paul posting a blog to Timothy (2 Tim 4:14 - 15) where he said, “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: Of whom you beware also; for he has greatly withstood our words.
You suggested the company was “simply enforcing their copyright laws”. Well first of all dear brother, “they” don’t have any binding copyright laws. We as a nation do, but they are for all of us and there is no law anywhere on the books that mandates, orders or otherwise requires a payment of $1,000 for an infraction. That was completely arbitrary on their part and I could have fought it. I chose not to fight it because it was my error and it isn’t worth worth the wear and tear on the chicken to fight them in court over this.
What I was upset about had nothing to do with protecting their copyrights. I endorse that! What I was upset about is that from every other website we have purchased images from, you are automatically blocked from downloading a usable picture. Then when one comes along that says “royalty free” and they let you download it, you don’t expect to be dinged $1,000 (a much higher fee than a single year%u2019s usage would have cost).
Mark, suppose I had product samples on my book table at the back of the room after doing a seminar and you came along and took one of the samples because you thought because they were a sample, they must be free. I would correct that misunderstanding with you but I wouldn’t threaten you with legal action unless you paid me 2 1/2 times the retail price and you still couldn’t keep the product unless you paid me an additional amount equal to the full retail. That’s what happened to me and I think others reading this may make the same mistake and I still feel quite comfortable giving the warning.
As for me being hot headed, well, I confess I was hot headed yesterday when I got their Settlement Demand, but I calmed down and was very kind to the person I spoke with and didn’t write the blog until today, after feeling quite calm and sure about this. I did give this issue some time before I posted it precisely because I didn’t want to be a hot head. I did post it because I wanted others to be fairly warned. Including you. I do however greatly appreciate you caring enough to post your comments. You are a valued brother in the Lord!
January 30th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Michael - thanks for the “heads up.” I do not agree with Mark; it certainly appears as though you did everything possible, before and after the situation, to handle it properly. No where in the Bible did Jesus ever allow himself to be a doormat - he confronted hypocrisy and bad practices and forced the perpetrators to face public scrutiny. You have done the same - THANK YOU!
I hope that I will see you in Atlanta next week, at the CFPN meeting.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:06 am
Hi Mike,
Thank you for your warning and the information provided. I thought Marks’ comments were a bit strong. But that is his perception.
I appreciate you taking the time to update me on something that I could normally take for granted. Keep up the good work.
I guess we should not be suprised by a companies lack of ability to see you as a client and not a one time sale.
January 30th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Thanks Michael
“Penny wise and Pound Foolish”, I too understand rules in business must be followed, but customers are very hard to come by. Good paying customers are even scarcer. When we are given fortune to develop a partnership we too must nurture that opportunity. I think both vendors have missed an opportunity to speak good will and future opportunity into the partner’s business. Now they are rich in $$ but bankrupt in good will and future opportunity. Seems so simple, and so natural to continue a relationship as a new relationship will take 10 fold the effort of the lost partner business
Thanks for this helpful reminder…a compromise would have been a great answer to a very common error.
January 30th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Dear Michael,
I have deep respect for you and I have purchased your copyrighted material gladly. We are in a business like you and sell intellectual property in the form of patented machinery. We also license others to use our valued assets which in our case is patent rights to use, make, or sell. I am very thankful that we have honorable competitors who also respect our patents. Most of these we are happy to license because they may now have, or will have patents of their own for which we may want licenses. We also have competitors who are going to use it until they get caught and then expect to pay only what others pay who were proactive and received a license prior to use. What if it were not brought to our attention that our patented product was being used/copied/infringed by others. It is not fair to those who have chosen to take a license proactively, report regularly, and pay accordingly.
All this being said, I understand that your case may be a little different here. And, you did make an offer to pay more than you would have had to pay for the 6 months that the images were in use. Can you see any parallel? Proverbs says that
there are always two sides to consider in every situation. Respectfully yours,
January 30th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Wow, this story hits home. I’ve recently been on both ends of how it’s handled. As the “purchaser” I recently closed an agreement with a supplier. Early on in the process I was told that our intent to use their product could be served by their “off the shelf” product. I was very clear in our intents, not hiding anything back about how we would use their product. I was handed off to someone else in their company better suited to address our needs. I soon discovered that the license for their basic product wouldn’t cover on needs, and that we’d have to use a premium product. I fully expected that (even though I was told otherwise early on) and was prepared to pay the extra fee for the premium product. The person with whom I closed the deal immediately offered me the first year at no charge (a pretty big penny!) as an apology of sorts for the misunderstanding. While I appreciate the offer (and even told her I didn’t expect to get something for nothing) they ended up leaving money on the table.
On the flip side, we recently had a customer sign up with us after completing our 60-Day Live Trial program (that program was inspired by the Moses Questioning Strategy!), but he never once saw the startup charge (which was delayed until Day 61, after the Live Trial was done). When it came time to pay the startup charge he called, quite upset. I calmed him down and showed him exactly where on our website it lists the startup charge. He agreed that it was his mistake for not noticing it, but was still upset for having to pay the startup charge. He said he wouldn’t have even considered us had he noticed that right away. In the “old days” I would have waived the startup charge as a sympathetic gesture. However, the way I handle these situations now is a method I learned from my partner (a fellow Christian). Present the facts, and let the customer decide what’s right. That’s what I did, and after a couple night’s sleep the customer offered to pay 1/2 the startup charge.
I hope anyone reading this story is still awake!
Actually, I hope others that may be in the habit of “giving away everything” to avoid a conflict can use the same advice that was given to me by my partner … for me it’s proven to be a great way to resolve tough issues.
January 30th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
A lot of good comments posted here. I just read the one from Dave Hultin… That was great advice and when I remember to use it, there’s a always a good outcome. Thank you for posting. Good comment from Charles Monroe about two sides of the story and frankly, all the comments were helfpul!
Others of you have responded to the email directly without posting your comments on the blog. Most of that is done out of respect, but I truly welcome all your input on the open forum of the blog. We may disagree from time to time… (You’re allowed to be wrong) (lol) but posting differing opinions on this blog stimulates thought and helps us all grow. All I ask is that we continue to maintain a respectful atmosphere while allowing for differing viewpoints.
Blessings!
January 30th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
And people wonder why their business is suffering. With so many choises for the consulter and so many small busineses going under it may be time for the owner to take a look at what is being said and done to the paying customer. What you shared is such a small part of a whole attitude that is permeating business today. I am not being cynical just reflecting what I see as a business owner specializing in helping businesses develop great client relationships. What you describe is good for all to hear as it causes us to face up to the little things we may be doing in our own business that is off putting. While you had an issue with Getty, most of us face indifference which is like a silence killer. Your experience is just another lesson to be learned and thanks for sharing it.
January 30th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Thank you for sharing this information.
It’s good to know that as Christian we don’t have to take being walked over.
I have had this kind of thing happen to me too and never used that company again, but at times had felt guiltly for it.
So it’s good to have confirmation that it’s okay to say “no more” to the wolves out there.
January 30th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Michael, I so appreciate your comments and how you handled the situation. So many wolves out there and such a challenge to do the right thing.
I recently went to a restaurant in my home town for a business meal. In checking my AMEX statement discovered that the waitress or restaurant charged me an additional $2.00 on a 15% tip. I decided to write the manager (who has a reputation for telling customers to never come back to his restaurant), explained the situation and included evidence of the wrong tip being charged. In addition, I sent him a book called The Fred Factor by Mark Sanborn to show him what a proper example of customer service can and should look like. I never received an apology from the restaurant or manager or a thank you for the book. I have told this story several times in my hometown. Bad customer service travels fast. We need to be fair but treat customers right in order to compete and be a God-honoring example for a world desparate to see honesty and integrity.
January 31st, 2007 at 9:02 am
Michael,
Thank you for the feedback. I want to know who not to deal with. Thanks for revealing a land mine.
January 31st, 2007 at 10:43 am
thanks for the info, michael — forewarned is forearmed!
February 1st, 2007 at 10:16 am
Michael,
Our Business has been in the same predicament you have; in fact it was with Getty Images that we had almost the same problem. We also experienced a similar heavy-handed response from Getty Images when we were made aware of the issue and tried in good faith to correct it.
And we also will never intentionally do business with Getty again.
Thanks for giving me a forum to tell this story.
February 9th, 2007 at 9:19 am
Mark Benefiel, If you came into the church I attend, and I was the Greeter, and I allowed you to get by me, knowing that you were a new face, without saying, “Hello, and welcome to __________ my name is Shelly, it’s nice to have you here.” Would you come back? If you came in, and I greeter you, you decide to join our congregation, then I stop treating you like you were somebody and meant something to someone would you come back to that church? If you were strong in faith and knew God wanted you there, sure you would. BUT, if you were someone in from off the streets and you were looking for the LOVE you couldn’t find in the world, I bet you wouldn’t come back. I bet you’d go back into the world and settle for whatever and whoever.
Businesses can tend to treat people nice until they get their business and then forget that it’s the people that the business is about. Churches can do a good thing to learn from the mistakes of the world, and diligent people who prosper watch others make mistakes and then apply what they learned to do or not to do to get a better result. I hope that’s clear. If not.. read it until it is.
-A Servant.