Copyright infringement via Permission Machine, acting on behalf of Alamy

If you are worried about infringement or your work has been copied and you want to take action.
frederik20
New Member
New  Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2022 11:14 am

Re: Copyright infringement via Permission Machine, acting on behalf of Alamy

Post by frederik20 »

Hello everyone,

I am also one of the lucky ones that gets bullied by this company.
It's about an image on a website I have not used in years and has basically been sitting idle.
I have read through this whole thread, but still have two questions that do not seem to be discussed.

1) Would it be an idea to try and directly contact the photographer. Do I understand correctly that he or she is in the end the determining party, and if he or she settles with you it does not matter what Alamy or Permission machine tells you?

2) Initially I was inclined to simply ignore their email. It also actually ended up in my SPAM, so that seems rather appropriate.
I get really frustrated by companies like this, that force mostly innocent (small) companies to take action, causing them a lot of stress and discomfort while they continue their disgusting practices. I am all in favour of rewarding creatives, but this is not that.
I see most people recommend to reply and respond; and i wonder why. Is this to indicate that you take appropriate action and are willing to work with them by removing the image? It almost seems that you acknowledge their faul practice..

I appreciate this forum and all the great content being discussed here.
User avatar
AndyJ
Oracle
Oracle
Posts: 2664
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Copyright infringement via Permission Machine, acting on behalf of Alamy

Post by AndyJ »

hi frederik, and welcome to the forum,

You can certainly try contacting the photographer but in many cases he or she will have employed Permission Machine in order that he/she doesn't have to deal with such matters. It may well be that the copyright owner's agreement with PM also prevents him/her from settling for a different fee once PM have found the alleged infringement and begun the process of trying to get recovery.

As for not responding at all, that is also possible and it may work - I have seen no evidence either way on whether this causes PM to abandon a claim. However, if the person being contacted realises that they may be liable for infringement and, like you, are in favour of rewarding creatives, then the issue needs to be addressed in one way or another. At the very least, the disputed image should be removed.
Advice or comment provided here is not and does not purport to be legal advice as defined by s.12 of Legal Services Act 2007
Habbers
New Member
New  Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2022 11:09 am

Re: Copyright infringement via Permission Machine, acting on behalf of Alamy

Post by Habbers »

Hi Andy

Thanks all very helpful. I replied and made an offer to include a £25 admin. fee. Inevitably this was rejected, their correspondence including the following blurb:
Please note that in the IPEC small claims track, our client can claim more that just the license fee if they chose to initiate proceedings in the UK, these include:
• fixed sums in relation to issuing the claim;
• court fees (including the hearing fee);
• expenses which a party or witness has reasonably incurred travelling to or from a hearing or
staying away from home for the purpose of attending the hearing;
• loss of earnings or loss of leave evidenced by a party or witness caused by attending a court
hearing, limited to £90 per day for each person (PD 27 para 7.3);
• in proceedings which include a claim for an injunction, a sum for legal advice and assistance
relating to that claim, not exceeding £260 (PD 27 para 7.2);
• such further costs as the court may decide at the conclusion of the hearing should be paid by a
party who has behaved unreasonably. A party’s rejection of an offer of settlement will not of
itself constitute unreasonable behaviour but the court may take it into consideration (CPR
27.14 (3)).


They followed up with a counter offer reducing the demand from £308.50 to £225. I rejected this and they have followed up with:

We are sorry to hear that you do not wish to proceed with our clients reduced settlement offer.

We will now prepare this case to be escalated to our solicitors to resolve.

Please note that the settlement will revert to the original amount and further administration fees will be added by our solicitors.


I'll reply basically saying "see you in court" and we'll see where this goes! I'll keep you posted.

Thanks for all help to date.
User avatar
AndyJ
Oracle
Oracle
Posts: 2664
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Copyright infringement via Permission Machine, acting on behalf of Alamy

Post by AndyJ »

Hi Habbers,

Thanks for the update. Their response is all very predictable, unfortunately. Please keep us informed with how things go.
Advice or comment provided here is not and does not purport to be legal advice as defined by s.12 of Legal Services Act 2007
Post Reply