$1 Billion Getty Images Public Domain Photograph Dispute is Over (torrentfreak.com)

Earlier this year, photographer Carol Highsmith received a $120 settlement demand from Getty Images after she used one of her own public domain images on her website (which is she had donated to the Library of Congress and made available to the public to reproduce and display for free). Highsmith responded with a $1bn lawsuit but after a few short months, as TorrentFreak reports, the case is all over, with neither side a clear winner. From the report: To begin, on October 28, US District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff dismissed each of Carol Highsmith's federal copyright claims. "Defendants Getty Images (US), Inc., License Compliance Services, Inc., Alamy, including that Inc., and Alamy Ltd. collectively moved to dismiss all claims of plaintiffs Carol Highsmith and This is America!, Inc. under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act,... the Lanham Act,... New York General Business Law,... and New York common law of unfair competition," the Judge wrote. "Upon consideration, the Court grants defendants' motions,â he added. With the federal claims gone, three state law claims were including that Getty charged licensing fees for images when it shouldn't have and collected settlements from alleged infringers when it had no right. However, these claims have now also been dismissed, along with the rest of the case. "It is hereby stipulated and agreed, by and among the parties, that this action shall be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(l)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each party to bear its own costs and fees," the Judge wrote in his dismissal. Since the case was dismissed with prejudice, it is done and cannot be brought back to court.

Comments

Re:Wrong person sued

[msauve]

She should have ignored their demand and if they then started legal action, countersued for malicious/abusive prosecution.

Re:"Neither Side a Clear Winner"

[Anonymous Coward]

And the judge also sealed the pre-trial discovery of information under a gag order... which I figure would protect Getty WAY more than the plaintiff Ms. Highsmith.

Also, the judge won't release his reasoning until later.

This smells to me....

Getty now a known perjurer

[laughingskeptic]

Hopefully defense attorneys will use this effectively going forward. Getty won't be able to claim anything and should have to prove everything. Signed document ... no good, we want to depose the signers, etc. That employee doesn't work for you anymore? ... too bad. Normally a judge would not considered these requests reasonable, but they are reasonable in the face of a corporation that has knowingly misrepresented their ownership of copyrights in court.

This is why FOSS / CC is better than PD

[Qbertino]

This is why FOSS / Creative Commons is better than public domain.
Had she released her images under a appropriate CC license, she could've sued Getty into next wednesday as she attempted.
With the images only being public domain, none of her rights were infringed expect for the unjustified bill.

I feel sorry for her. We should collect some donations.
This is one of the reasons I hate big-ass foundries, be it font or images. And the same reason I love CC and the artists creating things for a reasonable price.