Facing lawsuit from AP

[sporty]

Just found out today that I'm facing a lawsuit from a law firm representing the AP because of what they are calling copywrite infringement. What the issue is that I've posted my by-lined stories on personal website that happen to capture AP photos that are part of the link. I've worked for AP in the past along with other news organizations that subscribe to AP. They are asking for over $2,300 for the copywrite infringement. Does this sound right? Can they do this? I've never attempted to make a dime off the website. It's simply the means to display my portfolio. Any advice on what I should do? Also want to alert others to this possibly happening to them.

 

[justgladtobehere]

The amount of damages seems odd. I don't know why the AP or a law firm would care about $2,3000, unless that is just some jurisdictional figure they threw out.

Check the law firm and see if this is something they do routinely.

 

[justgladtobehere]

The amount of damages seems odd. I don't know why the AP or a law firm would care about $2,3000, unless that is just some jurisdictional figure they threw out.

They might be able to get lawyers fees, which would suck and change the dynamic.

Check the law firm and see if this is something they do routinely.

 

[SixToe]

They didn’t contact you prior to ask what’s up, request cease-and-desist, nothing else? Just “you owe us money!” seems strange.

 

[LanceyHoward]

I am not a lawyer but does AP have a published price list for their photos? Is the $2,300 what they were charging for the photos?

 

[BTExpress]

Just going on the site without logging in, the prices listed are $35 (digital only), $175 (editorial use on digital or print), $350 (TV) and $495 (corporate).

Perhaps AP was adding up all the photos he used.

 

[MTM]

The amount of damages seems odd. I don't know why the AP or a law firm would care about $2,3000, unless that is just some jurisdictional figure they threw out.

Check the law firm and see if this is something they do routinely.

Is the firm affiliated with AP or just saying so?

A foundation I've worked with put an advertisement on its website about an upcoming event and used random photos it found online. It was contacted by a law firm saying it was affiliated with the rights holder demanding a large amount of money. The total was negotiated down to a few hundred dollars, which was paid to avoid more inconvenience, but I doubt the rights holder got any of it or even knew of the threatened lawsuit. That firm scoured the Internet and sent out these notices hoping to collect penalties.

 

[playthrough]

Is the firm affiliated with AP or just saying so?

A foundation I've worked with put an advertisement on its website about an upcoming event and used random photos it found online. It was contacted by a law firm saying it was affiliated with the rights holder demanding a large amount of money. The total was negotiated down to a few hundred dollars, which was paid to avoid more inconvenience, but I doubt the rights holder got any of it or even knew of the threatened lawsuit. That firm scoured the Internet and sent out these notices hoping to collect penalties.

Reminds me of the lawyer who targeted hundreds of hotels/motels, mostly mom-and-pop operations, saying their pools weren't up to ADA code because they didn't have those handicapped-chair things. Many settled to avoid losing more at a trial.

 

[HanSenSE]

Many a moon ago, a weekly put some of our photos of a football game one of its schools played against one of ours, using "Photos courtesy Podunk Shipping News" on their captions. The shooters threw a fit, and when the editor found out I had not given permission to the Weekly Fishwrap to use our photos we threw a fit too. The Fishwrap got a delicately worded nastygram from our publisher.

 

[PCLoadLetter]

Many a moon ago, a weekly put some of our photos of a football game one of its schools played against one of ours, using "Photos courtesy Podunk Shipping News" on their captions. The shooters threw a fit, and when the editor found out I had not given permission to the Weekly Fishwrap to use our photos we threw a fit too. The Fishwrap got a delicately worded nastygram from our publisher.

I am always amazed at the number of people in the business who believe you can steal someone else's work as long as you put "courtesy" underneath.

Particularly "Courtesy YouTube."

 

[Shropshire Slasher]

Does anyone expect AP to proofread its own affidavits?

 

[micropolitan guy]

I'd wait for the second writethru before doing anything.

 

[dixiehack]

How does one “happen to capture” photos by linking stories? Are you using some template blog that is pulling them in? Is there no way to disable that?

 

[sporty]

How does one “happen to capture” photos by linking stories? Are you using some template blog that is pulling them in? Is there no way to disable that?

No not at all. These are links in my portfolio of my work. Some of the news organizations ran AP photos with my stories. Hell, I actually worked for AP as a senior writer for a couple of years. It's not exactly a scam but it's damn a money grab that won't work on me. I know better.

 

[Human_Paraquat]

My company holds annual training sessions with one of our corporate lawyers about this exact topic. Wrong usage of a single photo has cost companies thousands of dollars. A cottage industry has basically built up.

We no longer even embed tweets from accounts unless we have explicit permission to do so. Some of these policies are about getting out ahead of the next "violation" someone thinks of making a money grab over.

 

[User 4332]

No not at all. These are links in my portfolio of my work. Some of the news organizations ran AP photos with my stories. Hell, I actually worked for AP as a senior writer for a couple of years. It's not exactly a scam but it's damn a money grab that won't work on me. I know better.

When I am looking at your site, do I see the AP photo attached to your story or do I have to click through the link to the other publisher's website to see the AP photo?

 

[User 4332]

My company holds annual training sessions with one of our corporate lawyers about this exact topic. Wrong usage of a single photo has cost companies thousands of dollars. A cottage industry has basically built up.

We no longer even embed tweets from accounts unless we have explicit permission to do so. Some of these policies are about getting out ahead of the next "violation" someone thinks of making a money grab over.

There is (or was) a stock photo company that basically existed to file infringement claims against people who took their photos without permission. Like that was their business model and they were doing pretty well from collecting on claims a few years back because they'd send demand letters for several thousand dollars and then offer to settle for under $500 and a lot of people would do it. Trying to remember the name of it because it's been about 6 years or so since I helped a client deal with them.

 

[Slacker]

You mean if you have, say, a print copy of your 1A BCS title game and post the section front on your portfolio site and it has an AP photo that ran with the story, you can get sued for THAT? You're not posting a fresh copy of the photo, and you're not publishing for profit or even for any kind of money. Besides, your paper subscribed to AP at the time, so the photo was paid for then.

How does a photo of an old section front on your personal, semi-private resume/portfolio site break copyright law? If so, that's really nuts.

 

[Situation]

Unless you are directly hosting the photo on your site, there are no grounds to sue. Did you receive a letter, email? Who from?

 

[JimmyHoward33]

Did you actually embed the photo images or are these like screen grabs/shots of the print product that include the art? Or links to the original pieces? Seems to me if the original story has liscense to use the photo online you’d be covered but maybe not