4 ms·

My main association with Getty is their 'copyfraud' practises where they claim public domain images (NASA, Library of Congress etc) as their own and sell licens

My main association with Getty is their 'copyfraud' practises where they claim public domain images (NASA, Library of Congress etc) as their own and sell licenses[0]. They're also well known for aggressive acquisitions[1]. Perhaps this a good time to create a mirror [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getty_Images#Claiming_copyright_over_public_domain_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getty_Images#Claiming_copyrigh... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getty_Images#Acquisitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getty_Images#Acquisitions

ud_0 6y ago
Based on this behavior, my paranoid side is expecting a wave of copyright notices and invoices being sent to every single site that is using Unsplash images right now.
- dhimes 6y ago
  Hopefully they won't be able to revoke rights already given...
  - z77dj3kl 6y ago
    They can't, but they can attempt copyfraud as they seem to already be doing, see the aforementioned wiki article and public domain NASA/LoC images.
mfsch 6y ago
Careful about creating mirrors, the Unsplash license [1] explicitly disallows “compiling photos from Unsplash to replicate a similar or competing service”. [1]: https://unsplash.com/license https://unsplash.com/license
- haxiomic 6y ago
  Indeed, if you're putting something up online you probably just want to make it easy for users to switch rather than reuploading Offline personal archives and tools to create them I expect are permissible (IANAL)
klenwell 6y ago
Regarding Getty's "aggressive acquisitions", some interesting background turned up in this recent NY Times obit for Daniel Wolf: Daniel Wolf pulled off what may have been the greatest legal art caper of all time: Over the course of two years in the early 1980s, he quietly amassed some 25,000 classic and contemporary photographs, buying them from the world’s most renowned collectors on behalf of his client the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles. He was so secretive that none of the sellers knew about the others, or about their buyer — a stealthiness that allowed him, and the Getty, to pay about $17 million, “less than the price of a moderately good Cezanne still life,” said John Walsh, the director of the Getty at the time, in an interview with The Los Angeles Times. ... But nothing made quite as big a splash as the Getty acquisition. It not only gave an institutional imprimatur to collecting photography; it also soaked up a sizable chunk of supply, making the remaining works on the market much more valuable. “Suddenly, absolutely overnight, 25,000 of the rarest photographs ever taken were off the market,” said Weston Naef, who helped Mr. Wolf plan the acquisition for the Getty and later became its first curator of photography. “It would be like someone removing half the gold from Fort Knox.” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/24/arts/daniel-wolf-dead.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/24/arts/daniel-wolf-dead.htm...
- rdhatt 6y ago
  That is a different entity than Getty Images. https://www.getty.edu/research/library/faq.html#gettyimages https://www.getty.edu/research/library/faq.html#gettyimages > No, Getty Images has no relationship to the J. Paul Getty Trust. The "Getty" name derived from the same person, but the museum and Getty Images have nothing do with each other.
  - opencl 6y ago
    To be more precise, Mark Getty of Getty Images is J. Paul Getty's grandson. Some of the initial investments in Getty Images came from other members of the Getty family (who had inherited probably quite a lot of money from J. Paul) but that seems to be the extent of the relationship.
rustc 6y ago
> Perhaps this a good time to create a mirror Creating a mirror is forbidden by Unsplash's license. I wonder if there are any actually CC0/Public Domain image sites left anymore?
markdown 6y ago
Yup, they've taken rare public domain images from the vaults of museums around the world, claimed the copyright on them, and charge thousands of dollars to use them. Fuck Getty Images.

ud_0 6y ago

Based on this behavior, my paranoid side is expecting a wave of copyright notices and invoices being sent to every single site that is using Unsplash images right now.

dhimes 6y ago
Hopefully they won't be able to revoke rights already given...
- z77dj3kl 6y ago
  They can't, but they can attempt copyfraud as they seem to already be doing, see the aforementioned wiki article and public domain NASA/LoC images.

mfsch 6y ago

Careful about creating mirrors, the Unsplash license [1] explicitly disallows “compiling photos from Unsplash to replicate a similar or competing service”. [1]: https://unsplash.com/license https://unsplash.com/license

haxiomic 6y ago
Indeed, if you're putting something up online you probably just want to make it easy for users to switch rather than reuploading Offline personal archives and tools to create them I expect are permissible (IANAL)

klenwell 6y ago

Regarding Getty's "aggressive acquisitions", some interesting background turned up in this recent NY Times obit for Daniel Wolf: Daniel Wolf pulled off what may have been the greatest legal art caper of all time: Over the course of two years in the early 1980s, he quietly amassed some 25,000 classic and contemporary photographs, buying them from the world’s most renowned collectors on behalf of his client the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles. He was so secretive that none of the sellers knew about the others, or about their buyer — a stealthiness that allowed him, and the Getty, to pay about $17 million, “less than the price of a moderately good Cezanne still life,” said John Walsh, the director of the Getty at the time, in an interview with The Los Angeles Times. ... But nothing made quite as big a splash as the Getty acquisition. It not only gave an institutional imprimatur to collecting photography; it also soaked up a sizable chunk of supply, making the remaining works on the market much more valuable. “Suddenly, absolutely overnight, 25,000 of the rarest photographs ever taken were off the market,” said Weston Naef, who helped Mr. Wolf plan the acquisition for the Getty and later became its first curator of photography. “It would be like someone removing half the gold from Fort Knox.” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/24/arts/daniel-wolf-dead.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/24/arts/daniel-wolf-dead.htm...

rdhatt 6y ago
That is a different entity than Getty Images. https://www.getty.edu/research/library/faq.html#gettyimages https://www.getty.edu/research/library/faq.html#gettyimages > No, Getty Images has no relationship to the J. Paul Getty Trust. The "Getty" name derived from the same person, but the museum and Getty Images have nothing do with each other.
- opencl 6y ago
  To be more precise, Mark Getty of Getty Images is J. Paul Getty's grandson. Some of the initial investments in Getty Images came from other members of the Getty family (who had inherited probably quite a lot of money from J. Paul) but that seems to be the extent of the relationship.

rustc 6y ago

> Perhaps this a good time to create a mirror Creating a mirror is forbidden by Unsplash's license. I wonder if there are any actually CC0/Public Domain image sites left anymore?

markdown 6y ago

Yup, they've taken rare public domain images from the vaults of museums around the world, claimed the copyright on them, and charge thousands of dollars to use them. Fuck Getty Images.