We have removed the image from our servers, but I would be interested to know your resolution with regards to getty? Did you pay them?
Trey Nolen On 01/14/2011 03:15 PM, Dennis Körner wrote: > Yes it was me who wrote that blog entry. And I'm surprised that someone of > Inter7 is respondig to this now. When I wrote to Inter7 and to this list some > years ago. Noone of Inter7 was interested in that issue. They are _really_ > ignorant to still distribute this image in an open source package maintained > by them. > As I had contact to the original author of this image (Eric Pearle) it is > _clear_ that Inter7 has _no_ licence for this picture. Because this image is > under exclusive licencing by getty. And getty does not licence this picture > for redistribution. > If you ask me: Inter7 is knowingly bringing users of qmailadmin in legal > difficulties. And they are also ingorant about that. This is really hurting > OS. > > Regards > Dennis Körner > > > --- > Netzwerge Hamburg e.K. > Wandsbeker Zollstraße 13 > 22041 Hamburg > Tel.: 0 40 - 20 00 35 62 > Fax: 0 40 - 20 00 35 61 > i...@netzwerge.de > www.netzwerge.de > Amtsgericht Hamburg, HRA 104698 > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Johannes Weberhofer, Weberhofer GmbH [mailto:off...@weberhofer.at] > Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Januar 2011 20:49 > An: qmailadmin@inter7.com > Betreff: Re: [qmailadmin] copyright notice > > I think, the image should be replaced in the next release; even when the fee > could easily be reduced, it would be good to elimiate that problem. > > It seems, that Getty works systematically; I have found one German case > description: > http://www.denniskoerner.de/blog/2010/04/19/arger-mit-getty-images-und-den-waldorf-anwalten-wegen-qmailadmin/ > (english translation: > http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denniskoerner.de%2Fblog%2F2010%2F04%2F19%2Farger-mit-getty-images-und-den-waldorf-anwalten-wegen-qmailadmin%2F > ). > > Best regards > Johannes > > > Am 14.01.11 20:02, schrieb Trey Nolen: >> >> On 01/14/2011 12:05 PM, Matt Brookings wrote: >>> On 01/14/2011 11:57 AM, Dave Steinberg wrote: >>>> I'm not sure I'd be comfortable ignoring the unauthorized use notice. >>>> I'd be the one getting fined and dealing with the hassle, not inter7. >>>> Do you guys have copyright over the image or is it licensed >>>> appropriately from the copyright holder? >>> The guy who remade the templates way back when had ownership of the >>> image. Gettyimages has some web bot that goes around looking for >>> images they sell. Semi-automated harassment. >>> >>> If you're concerned about the image, open it up, paste white all over >>> it, and be done with it. >> I'd definitely remove the image and/or substitute it with something >> else, but the notice that we receive indicates that just removing the >> image does not absolve our responsibility to pay the fees. Do you have >> any proof of ownership for the image by the creator of the templates? >> Do you know who the creator was so that we might could make direct contact? >> >> >> Trey Nolen >> >> >> >> >> >> >> !DSPAM:4d30bd9d32711135820217!
