Copyright infringement claim from Rights Control - Science photo library

[Pemlee]

Hi can you update us how this was resolved ? I’m
in exact this situation. Thanks

[Yino74]

Hi,

I am facing the same issue. wondering if you will be able to share the general wording that you wrote back to them with the offer?

Many thanks
I.G

[Krendler]

Firstly THANK YOU to everyone who has given advice.

I had the same letter for a single photo from science images, the letter (demand) said its market value was £175, total bill was £3000+ (a clear scare tactic) I removed the image immediately.

I registered with the site, located the photo and called my new 'account manager' for a price. The quote was actually more expensive than the demand, £173 for a year or £240 to use forever. I used the above advice, offered them 175 for the image and 75 for admin goodwill etc... Within 5 minutes it has been accepted and new invoice sent. Yes it's not cheap but it's over now. £250 wasted... But lesson learned

Thank you to all, without this advice I would have ignored the letter and likely had a larger bill after summary judgement. This company isn't stupid, they have the evidence to win the civil judgement but the scare tactics are immoral.

Thanks again

[johnny38373]

Our company received a similar letter from Rights Control about a photo used on our website.

For anyone reading this post DO NOT rush to make the payment and don't fall for Right Control's pressure tactics of offering a lower settlement figure if paid within 14 days. Seek legal advice if you have access to a legal team as we did.

The information we found on this forum was incredibly helpful. By following the guidance we were able to settle at a far lower settlement figure than originally demanded.

Similar to the other posts the original amount was over £2,500 dropping to £1,000 if paid within 14 days.
We were able to locate the image for £30 and offered £75 to which we received a counter offer of £400.
We responded with our final offer of £100+VAT which was eventually agreed to.

Points to make when making the counter-offer
- Start your response with the line "Without Prejudice"
- Provide the cost of image
- Make an offer to cover the cost of the image (with a bit extra) plus an amount for admin fees
- Mention that the counter offer has been based on the damages a court would find appropriate if the claim is taken to court

Thank you to everyone who posted on this topic!

[Beverley]

Hi all

I just wanted to say a big Thank You to everyone who posted about Rights Control (aka Science Photo Library).
I'm self employed and have a website - just about every image I have on it has permission through the manufacturers or distributors, however, I copied 1 image of a bottle of Methylated Spirits from the internet and low and behold it was a licensed image by SPL (something I didn't know was a thing until I received their scary email).

After the initial horror of owing them £3.5k (on top of what was already a bad day), I finally calmed down and went home and did some research on Science Photo Library.

I found this really useful forum, along with reading their annual returns and checking on their registered address in London (which is under offer to a new lease holder). Anyway to cut a long story short, the whole thing appears to be a legal 'scam'. Yes, using a licensed image without consent/payment is an issue, but not as they bad as it appears in their emails with large red fonts and intimidating words.

So, with an initial charge of £3.5k, I was offered the chance to pay £1.7k in 14 days. I contacted them on the 13th day and offered £100 + VAT. I was unable to find out a license fee charge after contacting them and I even tried to contact the photographer of the image without success. By the way, every email to me was addressed as 'Dear Sir'. They never bothered to actually find out my name (it's on my website where they found my address and email), so I never gave it to them - I'm female btw!

Their reply was that the photographer needs to be paid the rightful amount and they need to pay the 'infringement detection provider' - I'm going to guess that that is fancy talk for a member of staff on minimum wage trawling Google. During our communication the license fee also changed 3 times. Anyway, they were now asking for £600. So basically, the amount keeps reducing by half. Needless to say red flags and alarm bells were ringing all over the place.

Still not providing my name out of principle, I replied again highlighting the lack of consistency in licence fee and that scaremongering and intimidation was unethical (I was prepared to see them in court at this stage). I repeated my offer of £100+ VAT.

I then received an apologetic email and that they would consider my offer and get back to me. Several days later the £100 was accepted and an invoice followed. I have paid the £100 + VAT and the case is now closed.

So, thanks to this chat forum, I realised that I was not alone and it gave me the determination to pursue their background and challenge them. It worked! They definitely thrive on scaremongering and intimidation - so if you are in this position DO NOT let them win. The fact that they are so unbelievably quick to reduce their costs every time is a red flag in itself. It's my opinion that they know that their exorbitant fees would not hold up in court if it ever went that far and they hope to instil fear into those of us who have innocently made a mistake.

I do feel sorry for anyone who pays them out of panic without doing any research. Let's hope others find this chat forum and make a stand.

[AndyJ]

Hi Beverley and welcome to the forum.

And thanks for telling us your story, I'm sure it will encourage others to resist paying the initial demand these companies send out, and be prepared to haggle.