Reply to: Copyright Infringement!!!

[Drewster]

Can you post the piccis here?.... MrsD is on the look out for some new stuff.......

[HairyArsedBloke]

and there you go. Left hand and right hand.

Supplier has just signed an exclusive 12 month deal for one Internet retailer to use their images.

The guy granted exclusivity then searched the internet and drew up a list of companies using the images and then with the agreement of supplier, sent out threatening solicitor letters to the suppliers customers(and people who had pinched the images)

There are a number of companies who are using the images and heavily discounting the product. Supplier has said they never place orders and hence aren't customers, but they have problems with people searching and then asking retailers to match the prices.

They have apologised and said I should never have been threatened! Big apology and letter of agreement to use images coming in post.

Rather than left-right, this sounds more like opening mouth before engaging brain! If these are existing images then a moments thought would yield that they would be in use somewhere so entering into an exclusive deal was bound to cause some arguments down the line. Now, if they have agreed that you can use them, they are not in an exclusive deal.

I have warned about using other peoples images, logo's etc before on CUK. I hope others will also learn from your adventures.

And ...... nice to get a result.

[suityou01]

and there you go. Left hand and right hand.

Supplier has just signed an exclusive 12 month deal for one Internet retailer to use their images.

The guy granted exclusivity then searched the internet and drew up a list of companies using the images and then with the agreement of supplier, sent out threatening solicitor letters to the suppliers customers(and people who had pinched the images)

There are a number of companies who are using the images and heavily discounting the product. Supplier has said they never place orders and hence aren't customers, but they have problems with people searching and then asking retailers to match the prices.

They have apologised and said I should never have been threatened! Big apology and letter of agreement to use images coming in post.

Interesting how the legal letters were all sent out to reach you on Friday so you had the weekend to "sweat" over it. C-astards.

[Sysman]

Result!

The bit about non-suppliers using the images to advertise stuff at knock down prices does show that it pays to keep an eye on who uses your images.

[Netraider]

[MarillionFan]

and there you go. Left hand and right hand.

Supplier has just signed an exclusive 12 month deal for one Internet retailer to use their images.

The guy granted exclusivity then searched the internet and drew up a list of companies using the images and then with the agreement of supplier, sent out threatening solicitor letters to the suppliers customers(and people who had pinched the images)

There are a number of companies who are using the images and heavily discounting the product. Supplier has said they never place orders and hence aren't customers, but they have problems with people searching and then asking retailers to match the prices.

They have apologised and said I should never have been threatened! Big apology and letter of agreement to use images coming in post.

[mudskipper]

Sounds bleedin' stoopid. Do you know who else sells their stuff? Have they got images on their website?

[downsouth]

i'd be calling them up to see if they did actually send the legal letter, just check it aint some sort of scam doing the rounds etc.

I run a couple of sites myself and never have a problem with images as you say most suppliers have a stock of images/descriptions to use etc, but personally i find it best to take some original images to stand out from the crowd

then you hold the copyright to the images

[MarillionFan]

Suing their customers? They must have hired a lawyer from the music industry

As d000hg says, it's probably a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. If you contact their sales manager/director and point out that this isn't the way to engender good customer relations, I'm sure they'll find a way to sort it out, either by licensing you to use their images or agreeing that, if you take them down, they'll say no more about it.

A friend of mine is a commercial photographer who does product shots and his standard contract allows the client an unlimited license to use his work for their own purposes, but not for anybody else to use it. If this company has entered into a similar deal then it may be that they are getting grief off whoever did their product shots about your unlicensed use of them, but even so they should have realised that there are more tactful ways of dealing with the matter than a letter like that.

Suing their customers! Unreal hey!

Thanks for all comments. I think the Left - Hand right hand is probably correct and possibly an issue with the photographer. It may well be that even though it's their furniture, they have a deal with the photographer.

It's interesting because, they actually provide a Trade Only website with high quality images, dimensions and descriptions to sell to a retailer. They do not sell to the public. You can also request a catalogue which is pretty good(but not electronic) which you can put in your shop and walk through with customers. Of course, all customers these day ask to take it away(it's massive) or is it on the web. You can't point a customer to someone elses website because a) It's someone elses, and b) It doesn't have the price I wish to sell at.

Frankly they haven't incurred any losses and I am gobsmacked at receiving a legal letter. As said, no way is it getting signed, and I have emailed the Sales manager to ask what they are doing, as we were planning to spend another £5k with them this year and do they no longer want our business!

[NickFitz]

Suing their customers? They must have hired a lawyer from the music industry

As d000hg says, it's probably a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. If you contact their sales manager/director and point out that this isn't the way to engender good customer relations, I'm sure they'll find a way to sort it out, either by licensing you to use their images or agreeing that, if you take them down, they'll say no more about it.

A friend of mine is a commercial photographer who does product shots and his standard contract allows the client an unlimited license to use his work for their own purposes, but not for anybody else to use it. If this company has entered into a similar deal then it may be that they are getting grief off whoever did their product shots about your unlicensed use of them, but even so they should have realised that there are more tactful ways of dealing with the matter than a letter like that.

[d000hg]

If the company is not small, two different departments might not be talking. I'd get in touch immediately and point out how much business you do, and say that while you're happy to work with them on agreeing something, unless they retract the threats you'll no longer work with them and will send back any stock (if that's possible).

If you link directly to their website images, they may have a script to auto-detect this which led to some process being followed. I'd say doing this is a bad move.

Hope you get it sorted out, I'd personally start on a polite "you must have made a misunderstanding" tack but could understand you having a bit of a go... let us know how it goes?

[OwlHoot]

Personally, I would take the images down and cancel the order, but do none of the rest. But then I'm not a lawyer.

Apart from anything else, if you apologise or sign a letter, you'll be admitting liability for any damage or loss of revenue they later "discover".

[Sysman]

In order to sue for damages, there has to actually be a 'damage'. I.e. they have to have incurred a cost, or lost revenue because of it. Maybe they can demonstrate that they lost revenue by not being able to charge you for using the image.

If they used a professional photographer, then he/she might charge royalties for usage, so that might be where they are coming from.

Could be, and here's another thought. What if the photographer has come across the images on MF's web site and is kicking up a fuss with the manufacturer?

Back to crawlers, a couple of years ago I looked up something which was crawling my site and found a company which claims to "fingerprint" images, looking for unauthorised copies out there on the world wild web. Their customers included the likes of Ford, Coca Cola and Sony (IIRC).

Some ways to protect your images, another link. I really don't recommend tricks such as disabling right click; that one raises a red flag with me and I will find a way around it, even if just to satisfy my own curiosity. What dissuades me from nicking images is some suitable text asserting copyright.

I've never tried protecting my own images, but after what I saw yesterday at a Plan B client site*, 'tis something worth investigation. One thought is that watermarking you add doesn't need to be visible

It's a useful lesson for us all, so thanks for sharing it MF.

* some Youtube videos and other camera work have been ripped off. PlanB client reckons that 60% of one video was her own work.

[centurian]

FFS. Just got a solicitors letter from one of my suppliers telling me to take down all images of their furniture, publish an apology and sign a letter that I won't do it again and that I agree to pay their costs and any associated damages!!!!

In order to sue for damages, there has to actually be a 'damage'. I.e. they have to have incurred a cost, or lost revenue because of it. Maybe they can demonstrate that they lost revenue by not being able to charge you for using the image.

If they used a professional photographer, then he/she might charge royalties for usage, so that might be where they are coming from.

Personally, I would take the images down and cancel the order, but do none of the rest. But then I'm not a lawyer.

[centurian]

I tried to wind AtW up on the fact he has not asked any web site owner permission to crawl their site.

He threatened he would get his lawyers onto me.

Yep - remember that thread well