Well it's more likely that a photographer submitted a bunch of public domain images claiming he/she owned the copyright. Then Getty images handled the situatio

Well it's more likely that a photographer submitted a bunch of public domain images claiming he/she owned the copyright. Then Getty images handled the situation poorly. Look at another Getty case. Haitian photographer Daniel Morel posted some photos to TwitPic. 'Lisandro Suaero' downloaded them and sold them to AFP / Getty. Then Getty tried to sue Morel. [1] Morel was awarded 1.2 million [2]. Getty tried to use a weird argument that they had a deal with Twitter so they didn't owe him anything. [1] http://blog.jeremynicholl.com/2010/05/03/afp-steal-photos-then-sue-photographer-2/ http://blog.jeremynicholl.com/2010/05/03/afp-steal-photos-th... [2] http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/1-2-million-lawsuit-shouldnt-steal-photos-twitter/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/1-2-million-lawsui...