Following on from tha phones 4 u thread it amazes me how often people seem to get shafted by these big brand companies and it makes you wonder how they ended up getting so big if their customer service is so shocking.
My situation is slightly different in that I'm not acting as a consumer. As a lot of you know I do photography. I have a lot of my photos represented by Getty Images who are responsible for licensing my images to their clients big and small.
For those who dont have an understanding of this. There are two methods for licensing an image.
Royalty Free means the client pays by the size they need and they can pretty much use it in whatever format they want.
More valuable images are called Rights Managed and the client has to specify not only what size they want, but the duration of use, the territory of use and various other things.
Well my best selling image over time hasnt sold since the tail end of 2010 after Microsoft purchased it. I always try to research where my images have been used which is often difficult when they are bought by ad agencies etc. So yesterday I did an image search of my photo called "Stormy Rye"
It turns out it's been used on shed loads of places and is being offered as a free downloadable wallpaper. Now this shouldnt be possible as the image cannot be licenced to be given away for free so I couldnt work out how it had happened.
Then I realised that every version of the image had "Bing" in the corner.
It turns out Bing have made it a Windows 7 wallpaper (which obviously is pretty cool and I'm proud of that) and have offered it on their website for free downloads. (not cool at all)
Now I know this is not allowed within the terms of licence so they must have screwed up. But effectively they have made my most valuable image worthless as it's everywhere and any level of exclusivity has been destroyed.
Getty's legal team are "looking into it" but this is their biggest client and I just absolutely know I'm going to get mugged off with some token attempt of a payoff and told that if it's not good enough I'm welcome to pursue the legal angle myself and let's be honest me against Microsoft? I should imagine whatever lawyers they have will be better than I could possibly get on a pay if you win deal, because I certainly cant afford to pay anyone up front!
Shafted!
I cant post the image here because ironically that would probably be against the terms of my contract but you can see it on my website
talkinginwhispers.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/Home-Counties/G00006RiwLD6771s/I0000xjiOlxtvaQI 
Comments
:-)
Standard caveat that it might not lead to anything ......
@ cordoban addick thanks for that. Looking for work at the moment so any potential leads at the moment are appreciated.
My guess is they'll charge Microsoft some token licence fee for it. Say $300 of which I'll end up with less than $100. But of course I might end up with nothing which is probably more likely.
Hope you get what you deserve mate.
She won't even contemplate going to all the hassle to try to get her rightful payment.
They wouldn't copy and paste a newspaper without attributing it to the source, nor would they repackage someone else's software as their own - why should they be allowed to do this?
I suggest just getting the word out there, look for sympathetic journos and see if there is anyway of getting some negative PR for them. Let them know about it though. One of my many hats at the moment is doing web development for a start-up portraiture house (standard portfolio jazz, custom CMS etc), and combined with my (amateur) passion for photography, I can imagine just how much that must sting to see. I have a friend who took The Guardian, The Daily Mail and a couple of others to court over using images that they hadn't got permission for; it's general sloppiness that seems prevalent throughout the industry. There's standard invoice templates and documents to get a claim against them going; I know quite a few guys that have managed to get payments from papers for the exact same issue. The advantage is, often there is no real fight as they're banged to rights - I'd give it a go mate.
I guess that's just another example of where they hold all the cards in this situation.
The next step is to see their response. I got another email overnight confirming that it's still being lookin into so at least I know I'm on their radar.
What to do when your image is stolen online
No Win No Fee for photographers
As an ex-employee of Getty, I am sure you know the score,and you are right to take the cover of them and try and get some sort of financial compensation, but as you have already stated the image has really lost it's value to you as far as it's future use.......
In February I was trying to get a 'deal' with Getty for 10 images, because the so called 'publisher' wanted a 'royalty free' licence worldwide for a brochure. I explained to him that he did not need that type of licence as it was going to cost a bout £1,000 an image. I had one of those feelings that he also wanted to use it on the web, and every place possible, not only for his 'business' : franchising and being a start up company, I told him to get a photographer to take some photos, and get full rights..... failing that go to 'i' stock and get what you pay for. There are some very dubious sorts who have moved into the media world of late......
IPR has always had it's issues. I have been the victim myself, it almost comes with the job. I must admit when individuals do it, or small companies I just try and get a credit. When I knew David Bailey had issues with vogue 30 years ago with his copyright from Vogue you could see where this was going to end up, and he just wanted to reprint them in a catalogue for the show at the V&A. And that lot are supposed to be a class act. 'Publishers'...... seem to have the moral compass of a sink estate drug dealer,not that of course that I am bitter.........
Then invest in Charlton
A few years ago I took a picture of an incident and sent it to the News Shopper, who used it on their front page. In the corner of the picture was a notice saying it was copyright Getty Images - how did that happen and how come I never saw a penny?!
The picture desk you sent it to probably claimed credit for it and either sold it to Getty or the pitcure desk was outsourced to Getty hense the branding.
If you want paying you have to make that clear. Although newspapers steal other people's work so often that if you had sent them an invoice the next week stating Saga Lout Photography, cost of one image £150, they would probably have just paid it to you to save you making a fuss.
Yes I have successfuly done this a few times.
I thought that Blackheath worked either for Getty or the PA, so he probably had his work protected under there copyright.
There is also the issue that if you work for certain organisations that they have a claim on your work, because they demand that you sign an exclusive contract and any work done, even on your own camera, and in your own time, at your expense is also there copyright.
There seems to be a world of difference in using a companies equipment, in there core time on company business, than the above You have to remember "There is a big difference in bending down and bending over".....as Frank Zappa once quipped