Complaint Review: Getty Images Seattle

I received a nine page "cookie cutter" packet of info, just like everyone else did who is writing about this same gut wrenching situation. I almost didn't open the packet because it was sent bulk mail. This is key. Nobody who ever wanted money from me or anyone else ever sent me a bulk mail letter. I opened it, thinking that it was just another scam, since I have three trademarks, and I get a lot of stuff that looks official, with requests for payment, which is actually nonsense. When I finally got around to looking at it -- I still haven't read it completely -- I freaked out when I saw what looked like an invoice, which was actually a demand for payment of $1,150.00, for what Getty Images said was the use of a rather ordinary looking palm tree, which I had my web designers incorporate into the header or banner at the top of my web site.

Getty reported that the tree -- yes, I'm serious, a tree -- is part of one of their client's images, which showed up in a computer scan of sorts. I had my site built by some young men in Miami, who had a team of web designers someplace in South America, probably Columbia. Before we started, I told them that I wanted a relaxing beach scene for the banner, that looked like Florida, with a palm tree. I figured that they'd shoot the tree in their area, or buy something online that was inexpensive. These guys are long gone. It's been six years now, and I'm not about to try to find them, since the need for their services within the high rise and hotel building industry in Miami, where they designed high tech web sites for builders, to attract people who were looking to purchase condos at a distance, has long since past. Like most of the other people who are writing a complaint about Getty Images, after two weeks of writing my heart out, I finally got a call from "Dave." I put his name in quotes, since my best guess is that every male in that department probably goes by that name. Previous to Dave, I spoke with Nancy, who signed the demand letter, who said that "I should have known" that my web designers either paid for or didn't pay for the image of "the" (not "a") palm tree.  Although I never admitted anything, I told Nancy that I never dreamed that my web designers wouldn't take their own  photo of something as common to south Florida as a palm tree, since they lived in Miami, like I did, and that if I had known ... I could have and would still be making a good living as a psychic. Give me a break!

Yesterday I was fortunate enough to hve been substitute teaching (I'm a semi-retired senior citizen) at a high school, in (of all things) an advanced web design class, where I explained my situation to the class, simply as a matter of interest. One bright young man said that it sounded like extortion to him, so I entered the keywords "Getty Images extortion" into my browser, and the whole world opened up to me!!

He advised me to completely ignore the matter, which I read online was a bad idea. But since I had already weritten them a nine page letter, followed by a three page letter several days later, both of which were sent via USPS certified mail, just in case there was a lawsuit, which Dave said would be the worse case scenario, I was already committed. Now keep in mind that when I asked Dave whether this situation would ruin my credit -- in order words, if I didn't pay the bill, would this be turned over to a collection agency. He said "no," but I don't believe him. I read online that they won't sue you unless you use a lot (20+) of their images, but since this is about one image, it's likely that they will press me on some level.

Dave and I are emailing now. I asked Dave to prove two things to me. First, that his client, whose name I got in my first demand letter, who I actually found online and wrote to (she was pretty annoyed, since I wrote to her three times), has a certified copyright document from the US government, proving that the image is hers, since without that document, both Getty and she have nothing to show to a judge, and their case (which will never happen in this instance) will be thrown out.

I'm going to keep writing here, hoping that my frustration and excellent writing skills -- I used to teach business communications courses (writter, oral) at the college level, and since I've never had to hire an attorney to get me out of any jam or fill out any government forms -- perhaps this will help you. The next thing I did was to contact my photography instructor. I'm not a pro; far from it, but as a fashion designer, I have a good eye. I took an intermediate digital photography class at a local art center a while back. My instructor is well known locally and extremely knowledgeable, since he worked at camera stores and volunteered at photo galleries, etc. His wife teaches PhotoShop and various photography related technology classes, so between them they have a wealth of information. My instructor told me, after comparing / eyeballing both images, which is all that we could do, that there weren't enough pixels in my banner, which is a JPG, to accurately compare the photo in question to the palm tree image on my banner.

He sent me a link to a web page online, which listed all of the large and small stock businesses that Getty has purchased over the years, one of which was in New York City, which is where the gal who shot the palm tree and beach photo lives, as well as Flickr, which had low quality images, most of which, according to my instructor, they couldn't and didn't use. He also told me that it's likely that if in fact my web designers had used the same palm tree image from The Image Bank, which is now part of Getty, that it is still unknown and undetermined whether or not the phtographer in question had an exclusive with The Image Bank at the time.

Now, keep in mind, that this stupid palm tree has been on my web site for six years, so I asked them "Why now?" and "Where have you been all this time?" Nancy (she refused to give me her last name; maybe she was afraid that I'd show up on her doorstep) stated that I wasn't being charged for the past five years' use; only the past year. Gee, that's nice!! $1,150.00 for the use of one ugly photo of a tree for one year. I knew something had to be off. Getty is pricey, but not that pricey. Let me stop here and mention something. I did my masters thesis on the stock photography business in Los Angeles when I lived there twenty years ago. My fiancee at the time was a stock photographer, among other things, and it seemed like a good idea, since we might actually be working together in the future. So I'm familiar with many of these companies and how they operate (more or less), but as far as extortion, which is defined as gross overcharging, well, that's quite another matter.

Meanwhile, after speaking with Dave -- and yes, I was relatively nice to him and he to me -- I got Getty to lower their fee considerably, and to give me more time to pay, but it's still too much money. I am going to ask a lawyer friend to write them a letter. I read online that when that happens, everything comes to a screeching halt. I hope so. Meanwhile, I replaced their client's (if it is hers) skinny, ugly palm tree with a better looking palm tree that I shot myself recently, to update my banner, which won't be enough to get them to stop dunning me for money. After this blows over, I hope to be able to come back to this site and let you know how things went. But for now, I'm really happy to have found the comments on this site from others. It really helped and it makes me feel like I'm not fighting this battle alone. Thank you!

I urge anyone who is reading this to keep researching this matter online, and if you know an attorney who is a friend of the family, who won't charge you, go ahead and have them write a letter for you ASAP, before your case is turned over to a collection agency. But you need to try to handle things at your end first, since it's obvious to me that no matter how much proof you have that you actually paid another company that was absorbed into the Getty family, it still doens't help. They simply want their money, and they don't care what you have to say. They're on auto-pilot.