Tweet
Our website had a copyrighted image. Higbee & Associates wants $1200. Pay?
A few years back, I got a vague but threatening note to my website claiming we'd improperly used material protected by copyright. I showed the note to my webmaster, Drew. We concurred it was clearly a predatory phishing expedition.
When, a little over a month ago, I got a direct email from someone with Higbee & Associates that listed the possible penalties for my willful unauthorized use of copyrighted material in excess of $150,000.
The photograph at issue was a Reuters-owned (apparently) shot of economist, Thomas Piketty standing before a bookcase. 2014 his massive and definitive Capital was published. I used a photograph that was handy: the front cover on the left, the Piketty bookshelf shot on the right. I had no idea this shot was 'owned' by anyone. This is back in 2014, but I'm sure I would've recalled if there'd been some kind of © associated with the shot.
Of course, I immediately deleted that post from my site, and informed them that their claims of trying to reach me resonated only as this one vague predatory phishing email some years ago.
They want $1200 I do not have.
They want my credit card information.
It just feels scammier and scammier, til a friend googled the firm
This is a great piece, worthwhile to anyone who has even a passing interest.
It's legal trolling, or more syntactically correct, trawling. These people copyright photos then retro-search all use of their images, searching for infringements. They threaten with the fullest penalty imaginable then set some arbitrary amount to 'settle'. They often get the attribution wrong, or the rights to an image revert from the photog (a new Higbee client) to the film production company (Fox Searchlight), invalidating the claim.
When, a little over a month ago, I got a direct email from someone with Higbee & Associates that listed the possible penalties for my willful unauthorized use of copyrighted material in excess of $150,000.
The photograph at issue was a Reuters-owned (apparently) shot of economist, Thomas Piketty standing before a bookcase. 2014 his massive and definitive Capital was published. I used a photograph that was handy: the front cover on the left, the Piketty bookshelf shot on the right. I had no idea this shot was 'owned' by anyone. This is back in 2014, but I'm sure I would've recalled if there'd been some kind of © associated with the shot.
Of course, I immediately deleted that post from my site, and informed them that their claims of trying to reach me resonated only as this one vague predatory phishing email some years ago.
They want $1200 I do not have.
They want my credit card information.
It just feels scammier and scammier, til a friend googled the firm
This is a great piece, worthwhile to anyone who has even a passing interest.
It's legal trolling, or more syntactically correct, trawling. These people copyright photos then retro-search all use of their images, searching for infringements. They threaten with the fullest penalty imaginable then set some arbitrary amount to 'settle'. They often get the attribution wrong, or the rights to an image revert from the photog (a new Higbee client) to the film production company (Fox Searchlight), invalidating the claim.