Site-uri pentru dating
I fully admit that we were in the wrong – but were we ,000 worth of wrong?That works out to almost 0 per page view, and comes nowhere close to any actual damages we may have inflicted on the photographer with our use of the image.I’m also saying that I have a hard time believing the photographer commands thousands of dollars per image – most of his work had nothing at all to do with photography, and he wasn’t an artist with any kind of recognition or awards to his name.Anyway, the website was new and it wasn’t an especially popular post – we could prove via Google Analytics that fewer than 100 people read it.This particular lawyer deals with one thing and one thing only: image copyright infringement.For the sake of the story, let’s say his name is Curtis M. The long-forgotten blog post that was published months ago had come back to haunt us. Leech sent the client a formal complaint letter, saying that they were being sued for ,000 for using his client’s copyrighted photo on their website.Let me be clear: I believe that photographers should be paid for their work and I think that people who steal images deserve to pay some sort of restitution for any damages caused.In fact, we pay for images every single day and we should’ve paid for this one as well.
Make no mistake about it, this practice can be a business killer (which means it can also be a job killer).
The photographer wasn’t famous, the photo wasn’t important (there was no grassy knoll or celebrity “gotcha” moment) and the photographer’s other works sold for nowhere near that amount.
That’s not to say the image didn’t (and doesn’t still!
To be honest, had this happened within the first few months of starting the company, we would’ve probably closed up shop and run back to living one third of our lives in cubicles, where it’s safe and there’s always health insurance.
It’s only because we hired a lawyer that we were able to get the copyright infringement penalties reduced via a settlement deal.