Getty Images Creates Online Resource For Industry Defense Against E-Data

What some people in the last months considered to be a bad joke, finally became an unpleasant reality: the attempt of E-Data to make money with their FREENY-patent ("Edata seeks royalties from all those who use its "patent" in internet transactions", so PACA). Getty Images yesterday created a webpage with lots of information about this problem:

Getty Images, in cooperation with Corbis and the Picture Archive Council of America (PACA), has established this compilation of current facts and resources for companies challenged by E-Data Corporation.
E-Data is actively demanding money and filing lawsuits against imagery companies it claims are infringing on its patent.

Related Articles/Introduction:
"E-Data sues Getty Images and Corbis"
"PACA Cries Out Loud: E-Data Against The Stock Photo Industry, Part II"
"E-Data: Settlement with Apple Computer, Pending Litigation Against Getty Images And Corbis"

That Getty Images has decided to create this webpage, is clearly a sign how dangerous this matter might become one day. Apple has already agreed to pay an undisclosed amount of money... (see the links above). Where will this end? If Getty and Corbis will have or agree to pay one day, E-Data would be mad (from their point of view) not to sue the next imagery companies: "We have a very strong track record enforcing our intellectual property rights...we will aggressively enforce our rights" (Bert Brodsky, chairman of E-Data Corporation). As we all know, there are some others out there. So again the question ("Getty Images and Corbis ... believe that the intent of the litigation is to set a precedent with the industry, and that money collected as a result of E-Data's demands will be used simply to fund future lawsuits against others"; Link):

How small has your photo agency to be not to get hit?

See also: "Getty Images institutes online resource for industry defense against E-Data" (pdf-file).

Comments

[Frank Bellstone]

Note that Jim Pickerell , of www.pickphoto.com fame, is actively consulting for E-Data.

In other words, anyone who's anyone in the stock industy is officially on the radar.

Getty and Corbis should be applauded for standing up to this shady company. One can only speculate that Apple, Microsoft et. al. settled for pennies (or nothing!), and that E-Data is desperatley trying to leverage its claims by citing such so-called "settlements."

I'm surprised Jim would go so low as to align himself with such an evil group of people.

[Phototalk]

Frank:

Maybe we missed something.

Do you really have any evidence that “Jim Pickerell ... of pickphoto.com ... is acitvely consulting for E-Data”?

Can you prove this assertion?

Personally we cannot believe this. See for example his story “Story 648, IS FREENY PATENT INDUSTRY THREAT? July 19, 2004 (Editor's Note: This story is by Nancy Wolff, Esq., General Counsel for the Picture Archive Council of America (PACA)“.

Frank, so far not response from your side, neither by comment nor email.
We have contacted Jim Pickerell. If it turns out that your comment is not true and some kind of harassment, it´ll be deleted.

[Jim Pickerell]

Dear Photo Talk:

It's true, I did do some consulting for E-Data. Most of what I provided was summaries of information I had already published in my newsletter and which is available to any subscriber if they want to dig through the back issues. I certainly did not do anything that would endorse E-Data's position. Part of my reason for working for them was to try to get a better understanding of their position so I could accurately inform photographers and stock agents, through my newsletter, of the risks -- if there were any -- connected with the Freeny Patent.

Clearly, E-Data is not interested in providing any useful service, but only in exploiting a patent that was granted in the early days of computer technology development when the patent office was very loose in the patents they granted.

I too applaud Getty and Corbis for standing up to E-Data, and I sincerely hope that they are eventually successful. However, given the way our legal system works, this is not assured, even if their position is the morally correct one, which I think it is. But from what I have been able to learn I think Getty and Corbis have a very good chance of being successful.

For the little guy, I think they have very little to be concerned about at this time. Given what it would cost to go after the little guys it probably won't be worth E-Data's time and trouble even if a court eventually supports their position.

In addition to publishing my newsletter, a significant part of my income comes from doing various bits of consulting for photographers, stock agents and investors to help them dig out facts and understand various aspects of the stock photo industry. I also serve as an expert witness in legal actions from time to time. In most of these cases my contribution is to explain standard industry practices.

I hope this explanation has been helpful.

Jim Pickerell

[Phototalk]

We finally had to learn that Frank Bellstone was right, but the "is actively"instead becomes a "was" (according to JP).

[Frank Bellstone]

Hi Phototalk,

Thanks for confirming. At the recent CEPIC Conference (in Copenhagen), Jim presented E-Data's lawyer to the industry.

Having now secure a complete database of anybody and everybody in the photo industry, I can see why E-Data no longer needs Jim's service.

Now he can continue to sell information gleaned from this Website to his subscribers without the guilty conscience.