Someone using one of my images without permission!

[Rob_B]

Thanks for the offer, I'd happily donate anything, although the amounts involved probably aren't worth bothering with :/

[Jowsey]

At the risk of being accused of necro-ing a thread, did you get any further with this Rob?

[ik9000]

At the risk of being accused of necro-ing a thread, did you get any further with this Rob?

No, that is a valid and sensible bump IMO. If you had posted

"I once saw a photo I didn't take".

And your post count was, say, 19, that would be when people start getting hacked off.

[scaryjim]

... If you had posted

"I once saw a photo I didn't take".

And your post count was, say, 19, that would be when people start getting hacked off.

That's peterB you're thinking of there We do have less extreme ways of dealing with post count pimpers, you know...

[Rob_B]

At the risk of being accused of necro-ing a thread, did you get any further with this Rob?

I’m afraid I didn’t go anywhere with it, on a hassle vs reward basis I thought it probably wasn’t worth it so it would have been done on principal alone. Turns out that even though I still fume about it my willpower to actually do anything about it is pretty non-existent

[Bobster]

I’m afraid I didn’t go anywhere with it, on a hassle vs reward basis I thought it probably wasn’t worth it so it would have been done on principal alone. Turns out that even though I still fume about it my willpower to actually do anything about it is pretty non-existent

And THIS ^^ IS WHY they do it.

[Rob_B]

And THIS ^^ IS WHY they do it.

Correct, as well as other reasons, never rule out ignorance and plain stupidity.

For me, who doesn’t do this as a job, or even as something on the side I can’t really justify the possible time it could take up, even a half day out of work would cost more than I’d hope to get out of them. Now I’m sure they might settle before then but who knows. I might revisit it but I have other things on my plate right now and no desire to add anything extra at the moment, any ideas how long you get to respond to copyright issues?

[ik9000]

any ideas how long you get to respond to copyright issues?

I imagine you have a reasonable period. you've already raised it with them, so you have acted. The interrim period seeking "advice" and so forth does not have to be limited to a certain time SFAIK provided it is "reasonable". And that is open to interpretation. 100 years, clearly not. 1 year probably ok. inbetween? Well accounts etc bills disputes etc can be pursued up to 6 years. After that forget it. So in that instance someone has ruled 6 years to be reasonable. You're well under that. Go for it, and if it's not about the money then Animus' offer to get some his high-powered business legal begals firing the artillery will have some real clout to it IMO. Cry havoc and unleash the dogs of war?

ps apple et al sue for copyright infringements going back years. Today's headlines are Apple losing against Wisconsin uni or similar under a 98 patent for things going back to the iphone 5s - admittedly it's in the states - but if you can demonstrate the timeline you can pursue it.

[Saracen]

And THIS ^^ IS WHY they do it.

Indeed. My view exactly.

In a situation that was sort-of analogous, but not identical, and in something that was my day job, I pursued a company that had used my work and refused to pay for it, I went through all the normal stages, then informed the company that they'd been given ample opportunity to settle and had consistently declined, so in one FINAL attempt to do it without involving legal action, I was prepared to fax them the completed, dated and signed court claim papers as an indication that I was serious, but that I was going to the court to take the papers in first thing AM on the day after tomorrow, unless I had a cheque for the full amount in my hands before then. And that at that point, all claimable costs and expenses, including legal costs, would be added.

A motorbike courier arrived with the cheque (> £3500) about two hours later.

As I said, though, it was my day job, the amount was absolutely quantifiable, and I had absolute proof (in the form of magazines the work had been printed in) that they had used it as well as their written assertion that they hadn't. In as much as a court case is ever a dead cert, I had them cold, and was absolutely determined to either get paid or go to court, and if necessary, to fund bailiffs knocking on their door.

But I know quite a few companies whose directors take the stance that they ALWAYS pursue debts, via court if necessary, on principle. Their reasoning is that being known for doing so prevents a lot of small amounts being written off if word gets out that they don't pursue small amounts. I do the same. If it's a good, valid claim, and all other reasonable attempts have failed, I will take it to court,100% of the time. Thankfully, it rarely comes to that.

I accept, though, that Rob's case is a bit different, albeit with similarities. It's not an easy decision, is it, Rob? But Bobster is dead right, a lot of companies are willing to do this BECAUSE, all too often, they get away with it.