I am a web designer and a photographer, this is my personal online portfolio and blog

The bigger the company, the harder they fall. Here is the docket link

Photographers Roger Ressmeyer, Richard Minden, Charles Krebs, Chip Simons, Ctein, Dan Sheehan, Dan Steinhardt, David Malin, David Scharf, Doug Landreth, Ed Darack, Frank Siteman, Fred Hirschmann, G. Brad Lewis, Jay M. Pasachoff, Jeff Foott, Jim Reed, Jim Sugar, Karen Kasmauski, Louie Psihoyoa, Nancy Kedersha, Natalie Fobes, Patrick Byrd, Paul Bowen, Peter Ginter, Richard Crisp, Scott Andrews, Seth Resnick, Stephen Frink, Steven Kazlowski, Stuart Westmorland, Tony Hallas, William James Warren, William Radcliffe, Chad Kleitsch, Caren Brinkema, Yoav Levy, Birgitte Wilms, Chris Newbert, Carr Clifton, Christian Ziegler, Helena Meyer, Colin Monteath, Flip Nicklin, Fred Bavendam, Gerry Ellis, Heidi Koch, Hans-Jurgen Koch, Hiroya Minakuchi, Ingo Arndt, Katherine Feng, Konrad Wothe, Mark Moffett, Mark Raycroft, Mathhias Breiter, Michael Fogden, Patricia Fogden, Michael Durham, Michael Quinton, Naoko Hoshino, Mike Parry, Misuaki Iwago, Norbert Wu, Patricio Robles Gil, Pete Oxford, Piotr Naskrecki, Richard Du Toit, Shin Yoshino, Sumio Harada, Suzi Estrerhas, Tim Fitzharris, Dorothy Vezo, Tui De Roy, Zhinong Xi, San Diego Zoo, Yva Momatiuk, John Eastcott, Chris Rogers, Coco McCoy, Dan McCoy, Mark Newman, Michael Doolittle, Paul Skelcher, Skip Moody, The Estate of T.J. Florian, Tom McCarthy and William McCoy (It’s a lot right?) are suing Getty images for copyright infringement in a New York court.

A jury will decide whether Getty infringed these photographers copyright over their images, by “sharing” their images from a rights-managed model, across to a subscription model with a much lower pricing structure.

I am very interested to see how the contract between the photographers, and the Getty web site, will hold up in court. Is it the case that once you upload these images you give free reign to that web site to charge whatever they want to for the images. Or do they have a legal obligation to you, to give you what you signed up for, which was a fair price for your work.

Plaintiff Roger Ressmeyer, owner of the Science Faction Image Collection announced only 3 years ago:

“We are delighted to be partnering with Getty Images, the undisputed leader in imagery distribution and services, through their powerful distribution platform, we believe that this relationship will enable the Science Faction Image Collection to reach a vast audience of communication professionals around the world.”

Looks like that didn’t work out as Getty compete with the microstock and subscription market! I’ll keep you posted when I hear more..

Link to legal rep

Quote from legal rep link above – 18 June 09

Among the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit are some of the world’s leading photographers. Their photographs have been licensed by Getty to major media clients for as little as $2.08 for extensive, untracked use. According to Nelson “Getty’s prices have severely undercut the market for comparable photographs, damaged the future market for these photographs, and violated both the Rights Managed Image Distribution agreements Getty signed and the Uniform Commercial Code.

Add to social bookmarks: del.icio.us | Tweet this: Tweet |