We need to get something straight for the people who read this and message me. I have always said it is not about the money. It is not about the money and the only people that believes it is about the money are totally absent of any artistic ability and think is it ok to take other peoples’ work or things if they think they can get away with it. You sue someone in this business to stop them from doing it again and to get paid for work, not for financial gain. There is at least one person who will read this that is not capable of understanding that and it is not 32. Statutory damages are for punishment. I do want to thank the people who alerted me to the photo going up. I do not know what to say. It is nice to see good people still exist. I think we need to create a photographers’ guild or something to do that for all of us and we can get the infringers to pay for it.
I am upset that people feel it is ok to do that. They just are not smart enough to figure out the truth. The 32 photo infringer as you call her, I have no animosity toward her. I hate what she has done and that she believes it is ok. She will believe this is about money because she has been taught that way her whole life. She knows nothing else. That is the family she has been brought up in. It seems everything about her is about money and possessions. If she could take the time to think about it she would realize it was never about money. She had pictures up on her Facebook account, registered copyrighted photos of mine. Whether they are still there or not does not matter, they were and copies were gotten a long time ago and sent to me. I know she has one of her and several of her sheep that I took. I took the sheep pictures because the lambs jump a lot. They were shot with a Nikon D300 with a 400 mm fully manual lens in 2009 and registered. A sample is above. I could have and still could collect a nice sum of money from her for them if I so chose. There is no defense, she might think so but she will learn. And the amazing thing is this is just the first round. There are the issues on the library and the disk with the for-hire work to be dealt with in federal court for her. The library is mine to deal with her on but the other I am banned from doing by the law. She will be dealing with others on that and that one easily could be 6 figures just for the one side of the attorney fees.
Remember I said that you have to do this for the work not the money. She enjoys those photos on Facebook and I would not take that away from her. I appreciate people liking my work so why would you do sue someone for those images unless it is about money. The house as you have mentioned is an asset that could be held up or the money froze under the Bush rule. I have no intention of doing that. I have never been interested in that thing. I have sent her emails saying so. If all that anyone who reads the infringement articles comes away with is photography is about money, then you should work retail or in an office because you have become one of them. The federal system is totally different than the states but even the states freeze assets until decisions are made. Look at a divorce, the court orders it and you can do nothing about anything until the court clears it. Same can be done here and could have been done months ago with her just getting a notice that her bank accounts were frozen. The feds froze a company for infringement that had hundreds of employees as I was told. The employees lost their jobs and the company closed because they could not pay anyone.
I get angry when people who take from others think they can get away with it and think it is ok. It is not. They will try a hundred different ways to make it someone else’s fault. Just like the real estate example, they claim it is the system’s problem. Well guess what, THEY are the system. If you do the work you deserve to get paid. You take these same people who basically steal from people and you walk in a Friday, pickup their paycheck and walk out the door. What do you think they will do and say. Take it out of their bank account. That is exactly what they are doing to you. They think it is ok for them to do it. A simple dual standard system that allows them to do anything they want.
As the attorney has said, I have invoiced them (mistake on my part) so I have to live with that for now. If they do not pay it the amount goes up but then it also gives them a few more days to pay it. If not, then the real issues start for them and unfortunately maybe for the homeowner as well.
As I have said, this is real life with real live people taking work, making money off of it and screaming foul because they get caught. Too bad! I spent some time this afternoon working with people to find a way to get this mess where it needs to be. It needs to be on the real estate syndication system but that is just a name of a group of companies and individuals. It appears that I have to go after the real estate company, the brokers and maybe the homeowner. It may come down to adding the house and new homeowner on the order also because of some quirk. I hope not. Not something I relish. The other part is to file another copyright infringement lawsuit against Realtor.com for using one of my registered copyrighted photos on their site. Then in turn they would sue the realtor and the MLS. The MLS would in turn sue the broker and brokerage and the homeowner for money and maybe fraud for using a photo that they knew was not allowed. They can blame the system, but the system is the one who would be suing them. Just read the Terms of Service for them and you will see the trail and where it leads. Lawyers sure have a funny way of thinking but it seem like it works. I either get paid for my work by the brokerage or they get sued and it may be a requirement to include the homeowner. That is still in the air right now. If I get paid that part goes away. The other suit against Realtor.com and others is a totally separate issue with a different infringement. By the time it gets down to the brokerage and the homeowner it could be years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees alone depending on how many layers it has to go through. I will not be there as mine will be long over before it gets to them. The terms of service do not say I cannot sue them and collect. They say the person or company that uploads items to them will pay all the expenses and legal costs.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney. This is my opinion and general information. It is not legal advice and should not be used as such.