I'm specifically having trouble understanding these two bits, please ELI5: > that their customers are getting large payment demands and > Getty had hoovered

I'm specifically having trouble understanding these two bits, please ELI5: > that their customers are getting large payment demands and > Getty had hoovered up everything in that library, assumed rights, and was selling it Does Getty specifically assert copyright that they don't have in these letters? Or is it more like a "You might be using an unlicensed image and that would cost you thousands, buy a license here"? The whole thing sounds absolutely ripe for an enterprising legal firm and a RICO suit with the 3x damages. EDIT: I'm struggling to find a copy of Exhibit A in the case, the letter Getty sent. Anyone have a copy?