When The Copyright Trolls Came for Me
By Victoria Strauss | June 23, 2023 |
If you’re a writer who’s serious about a career, you probably have some form of online presence: a website, a blog, an Instagram account. You may make use of images and/or videos created by others–to add visual interest to your blog posts or newsletters, build out your website, and engage your readers and followers. For example, the header image I’ve placed at the top of this post.
Online image use is not without its dangers, however. It offers fertile ground for copyright trolls.
What’s a Copyright Troll?
Wikipedia defines a copyright troll thus:
A copyright troll is a party (person or company) that enforces copyrights it owns for purposes of making money through strategic litigation, in a manner considered unduly aggressive or opportunistic[.]
These kinds of copyright trolls create and register copyright to content that they then make widely available online, to increase the possibility that people will re-post it without permission. Using sophisticated search tools and algorithms, they find infringers and use threats of litigation to shake them down for cash settlements.
More indirectly, some companies and law firms specialize in copyright threats on behalf of third parties, seeking out infringers (and often roping in non-infringers as well), filing or threatening to file suit, and demanding large fees (in many cases, far exceeding the actual value of the intellectual property) to close the claim.
A major pioneer of third-party copyright trolling was a company called Righthaven, which licensed rights to news articles and then used the threat of lawsuits to coerce people who posted the articles—or even snippets of them—into paying thousands of dollars in settlements. Another notorious practitioner was former lawyer Richard Liebowitz, who employed a similar M.O. on behalf of photographers.
Karma did eventually bite back: Righthaven was sued out of existence, and Liebowitz was suspended from the practice of law in New York State. But copyright trolling is alive and well, and if you post images online, you may become a target—as I did a few months ago.
My CopyTrack Adventure
Like many people favored with attention from copyright trolls, I was a bit freaked out when I received an email from CopyTrack, an “expert for the global enforcement of image rights” that’s widely enough known in trolldom that there are explainers addressing what to do if they contact you.
You can see the image and how I’ve used it here. (Note that this is my personal website; I’ve used the same image on the Writer Beware blog, but copyright trolls prefer to focus on individuals, who are less likely to have the resources to defend themselves.)
Because of Writer Beware, I’m often targeted with various kinds of threats. Mostly these can be safely ignored. But though I’d never heard of CopyTrack, I had heard of copyright trolling, and the general consensus is that non-response is not a good idea.
The link in the email above leads to the CopyTrack Settlement Portal, and a form where I was asked if I had a valid license to use the image. Here’s another feature of copyright trolls: they don’t do a lot of due diligence before sending out their scary communiques. In fact, I did have a license: from Shutterstock, where I subscribe to a plan that allows me unlimited use of images downloaded from the site.
I filled out the form and uploaded a screenshot of my most recent Shutterstock invoice as well as a screenshot of the image’s ALT text on my website, where the photographer—and Shutterstock–are credited:
To give CopyTrack credit, the process is quick. I heard back within a day with a request for more information, which I provided. The day after that, they closed the case.
My shakedown experience was relatively mild. Unlike some copyright trolls, CopyTrack isn’t a law firm, so it couldn’t pre-emptively hit me with a lawsuit (though it doesn’t skip the fear factor, making clear in its initial message that it is capable of escalating cases to lawyers). Nor did it demand thousands of dollars, as some copyright trolls do—though 200+ euros for continued use or “compensation” isn’t chicken feed (per its website, CopyTrack keeps 45% of any money it recovers).
Other copyright trolls that pursue or have pursued users of images: PicRights, Higbee and Associates, KodakOne, Pixsy, and Photoclaim. That’s not an exhaustive list, either.
The Importance of Protecting Yourself
The resources I consulted in my research for this post agree that copyright trolling is on the rise—and as my experience shows, you don’t have to infringe to be a target. In that environment, it makes sense to do what you can to defend yourself.
What does that include?
- First and most obvious, if you use images, make sure you have the proper licenses and/or permissions, or that the images are free to download under a Creative Commons license, such as photos from sites like Pixabay and Unsplash (though do read the license terms: there may be restrictions on use, such as a requirement for attribution—and yes, trolls come after people for messing that up too). Giving credit to the image creator and/or linking back to the source is polite, but it won’t protect you from copyright claims.
- Keep good records. If you purchase images individually, or subscribe to a stock image website like Shutterstock or Getty Images, keep your receipts on file. If you obtain permission direct from an artist, make sure it’s in writing. If you use one of the free image sites, keep a record of the search terms you use or take a screenshot of the download page so you can show where you got the image.
- If you accept guest blog posts, require the guest blogger to prove that they have permission to use any images they contribute. Posting an unauthorized image may be someone else’s mistake, but if it’s on your blog or website, you will be the one getting trolled.
- If you outsource content (such as employing a third party to produce blog posts or other web content for you), be sure you know what your liability is. In an ideal world, the person or service will indemnify you against error, but if copyright ownership is transferred to you, then you, not they, will be on the hook for any infringement.
- Don’t ignore a copyright infringement notification. If you websearch CopyTrack, you’ll find comments from people who say they ignored it, and after two or three attempts it gave up. You can’t count on that happening, though–plus, as mentioned, CopyTrack is not a law firm. In many cases, the notifications do come from law firms, which can actually sue you. Blowing off notifications and deadlines can have adverse consequences.
- Finally: if you have a valid license, as I did, by all means go through the steps to prove it and close the case. But if you don’t, or if there’s any ambiguity or question, or the troll is demanding a lot of money…seek legal advice, preferably from a copyright attorney. Don’t try to handle it on your own; don’t try to settle on your own. There are defenses a lawyer can invoke (here’s an example), and they may be able to reduce the fee.
Oh, and the image at the top of this post? It’s a download from Flickr, under a Creative Commons license that requires attribution and a link back to the source, both of which I’ve provided.
Have you ever heard from a copyright troll, or been accused of copyright infringement? If so, how did you respond?
Victoria Strauss is the author of nine novels for adults and young adults, including the WAY OF ARATA epic fantasy duology (THE BURNING LAND and THE AWAKENED CITY) and PASSION BLUE and COLOR SONG, a pair of historical novels for teens. In addition, she’s written a handful of short stories, hundreds of book reviews, and a number of articles on writing and publishing that have appeared in Writer’s Digest, among others. In 2006, she served as a judge for the World Fantasy Awards.
She is the co-founder, with Ann Crispin, of Writer Beware, a publishing industry watchdog group that provides information and warnings about the many scams and schemes that threaten writers. She received the Service to SFWA Award in 2009 for her work with Writer Beware.
She lives in Amherst, Massachusetts.
Thank you, Victoria. As always, excellent alert and advice. You are a gem.
Has anyone received a message from Rose Taylor, Literary agent, Penguin Random House Book Acquisition? She said they want to purchase one of my books. I have been burned in the past and am super cautious! Let me know if you have any information about this individual.
Hi, Theda,
This is a scam, I’m afraid. I’ve gotten several recent reports of it. Real agents don’t contact authors out of the blue, or submit books for authors they don’t already represent.
Would you forward the message to me for my files? My email is beware@sfwa.org. Thanks.
I’ll keep this in mind! Always uneasy about infringement, I now take my own photos for my blog, or accept (& attribute) photos from people I know and trust.
Victoria, thanks for this heads-up. These days, we all use words and images from others, so your caution applies to virtually everyone who writes.
I have a question. I frequently “share” images that come to me on Facebook. They are usually posted to me by someone who didn’t create the image or text. Am I and others at risk for sharing such images or language without doing something in terms of additional attribution? Thanks again for your post.
Hi, Barry,
I assume you mean that you share these images _on_ Facebook, via your FB account? Good question. Take this for what it’s worth, from a non-lawyer…but in my research, I didn’t see any references to copyright trolls targeting image-sharing on social media. I would think that tracing use and ownership of such images, which may be shared thousands of times by successive generations of social media accounts, would be a nightmare; much easier to concentrate on individual users.
Thank you, Victoria. I’m so glad you posted this. If I had received that email I probably would have thought it was a scam and deleted it. I got caught in a big scam once, I’m embarrassed to say, and I’m extra careful now. So glad I know of this now.
I had the same reaction when I first saw the email–given how much scam/spam stuff lands in my Inbox, it seemed very suspect. I did some research before I clicked the link.
I’m hit frequently by music copyright trolls on YouTube that then claim all revenue from videos I’ve created, all with licensed music. Sometimes disputes work and the claims are released. YouTube sides with the claimant if they don’t bother to respond, even if you have all the paperwork. If you don’t want to spend thousands on lawyers, you’re out of luck. It’s very frustrating.
This happened to me too. For a while I had the same material on two blogs; on my personal blog at wordpress.com, where people actually found and read it, and on my publisher website, which also had a blog, but which very few people visited. A couple of years ago, I thought I’d start adding links to buy my books on my publisher site so I removed any pictures that I didn’t take, myself, from my blog. I was pretty sure I could argue fair use because it is a personal blog, for the most part, but decided to be better safe than sorry.
However, dunderhead that I am, I managed to miss one. It was a picture of a statue of Winston Churchill with a piece of turf on his head to make a Mohican. I’d found it on the net somewhere, unattributed and naively posted it to illustrate a joke about statues and pigeons.
I was contacted by PicRights who wanted £900 for a license to use the photo. I contacted the photo’s owners and they refused to sell me a license but I noticed that a license to use it as a book cover was £40. I pointed this out to PicRights and sent them proof that the blog post in question had received two hits in the previous 12 months. I wasn’t sure of my rights, but luckily I’m married to a bloke who was one of the country’s top technology lawyers at the time so he’s quite good on this kind of stuff and where he isn’t, he knows someone who is. There was protracted negotiating. Fuelled by the fact that if they sued me in the UK I knew they’d have to pay their own fees and their claim wouldn’t be worth taking to court, I called their we-will-sue-you bluff. I pointed out that the blog was patently personal and they refused to accept this. The amount to pay dropped, in stages, until they wrote to tell me that they’d got it wrong initially and that as it was a personal site they’d only charge me £104. By that time, despite knowing that if it’s personal, it’s fair use, I gave them £104 to go away. It took them about 4 weeks to reply to each email because these guys were clearly not lawyers and had to go back to the big boss for the next answer. The whole process was ongoing for about seven months.
I am seriously unimpressed with The Press Association, whose photo it was, for retaining these people.
Since then my site died so the blog is no longer there anyway, and I have removed all photograps that are not mine from the wordpress one.
For me, I don’t get enough traffic to justify paying to use photos so I only use my own photographs and illustrations, or my book covers, the copyright for which I own.
Oh my friends be warned by me … as Hillaire Bellock once wrote :-)
Wow–that sounds like a really stressful and unpleasant experience! In my research, I found a lot of material on PicRights and their super-aggressive tactics, often in association with Higbee & Associates. Such a racket. Thanks for sharing your cautionary tale!
These trolls are all over the place, making legal claims in all areas of practice (e.g., ADA violations), and more than one lawyer has lost their license pursuing these schemes.The ones I’ve dealt with in my legal practice would make settlement demands for $5000. The first couple times, we settled. After a while, I got so disgusted with them, I just started ignoring their Complaints. They’re in it for a quick buck and aren’t excited about incurring their own costs to actually pursue a lawsuit, so I’d wait them out. If a year went by without them filing their Complaint with the court (this is in Minnesota) the whole thing would “age out” according to Minnesota Statutes and could no longer be pursued.
Thank you for this! I knew in my gut that using images without permission was forbidden, but never imagined it would actually come back at me. I just went through my blog and removed the images I used without permission. I left the adorable picture of my granddaughter.
Thanks for this article. I’ve not heard of copyright trolls before, but given we have all sorts of trolls roaming digital realms, I’m not surprised.
Luckily, I only use my own images and videos on everything I post, even when I did a challenge series on Covers Makeovers (a fun project that, and (if curious) here’s my favorite cover makeover: Lord of the Rings).
I’m also very careful to use only music I have permission to use, and the same for any cartoons I post.
Unfortunately, I occasionally find my stuff elsewhere (without permission), but it’s usually not worth making a big deal out of it — at least not until I become famous (I’m quickly running out of time).
I also wonder if some of the fiction I publish on my blog finds its way to other blogs or is appropriated by someone somewhere else But, again, not a big deal until I’m famous.
I found myself wondering about those of us (most writers I know) who use images on Canva to make social media posts, FB headings, Blog post headings, etc. We purchase Canva license; they purport that they have rights to the photos. Does this cover us?
I would think so–just like my Shutterstock subscription protected me. Looks like your question is answered here: https://www.canva.com/policies/content-license-agreement/
Forewarned is forearmed. Thank you so much for such a helpful post. I’ve thought back to the photos on my blog and I do have a few seemingly innocuous images on there that I didn’t take. I don’t want to assume my exposure is limited on the basis of little traffic after reading what I could go through if contacted by a troll.
When I was about 22 years old, I was running a fan site for an actor. This was back in early 2000s, so the internet was just starting to become a civilized territory. Naturally, fan sites are nothing BUT copyrighted material. Usually no one gives a shit, or at least back then no one did. Until a photographer emailed me saying I had zero right (true) to use his (small and low-resolution and unprofitable and mediocre let’s be real) portraits of this actor, several of them. On the site we categorized photos by photographer and photoshoot, really damn responsible (despite no license), so I do think it was indeed him (and not a competitor website, which is a novel-worthy tale in and of itself), since he could have searched for his name and found it on the site.
So this photographer who knew it was just random young adults screwing around in the internet committing idolatry for this actor, but had the absolute gall to demand $3000 PER PHOTO that I used of his. Whether or not it was indeed him, dunno, don’t care anymore (I am now divorced from the webmin life), but I sent him a “My guy, I’m a 22 year old grad student with $200 to my name. I have no money. The photos are removed. Have a nice day.” and never heard back from him.
I consider this fuckin guy a troll, because like, my guy, my dude, literally no one is going to profit off of unprintable low-res pics. And yeah he had every right to litigate. But I have every right to call him a clown.
Classic trolling! Nowadays he’d sign up with CopyTrack or PicRights.
Victoria, do you know of any cases where the trolls have tried to claim right infringement for photos taken by the author? E.g., disputing they belonged to the author? I ask as, while not a professional photographer, I have probably 10,000 images that I’ve taken myself of ancient sites and museum objects from Greece, Bulgaria, Italy, and in the US, which I use on my own websites (and social media). Sometimes they do, then, show up in image searches. How on earth could one prove these are one’s own pictures? Theoretically, Joe Blow with money could hire a firm to claim I “stole” “their” pictures. I have all the originals in files in the cloud/on my computer (and the original memory cards too, although largely as a backup in case of catastrophic failure of my uploads). I am very much small fry in the world of the internet and fiction writing, but it does occur to me to wonder.
Hi, Jeanne,
I didn’t discover any cases like that during my research. Although copyright trolls are often predatory opportunists that cast a wide net and sometimes rope in people who’ve legitimately used images, or who misused them in a way that’s completely trivial from a rights perspective and don’t deserve to be hit with four-figure settlement demands, they do typically either own the IP or are making the claim on behalf of someone else who does. I suppose it’s possible that someone could do what you describe, but my general sense is that it’s unlikely.
Take the above FWIW from a non-lawyer. I am not an expert–just someone who has a decent understanding of copyright and has done some research. And if you ever are targeted by a troll for using your own photos, definitely get legal advice before responding.
Thank you! And that’s good to hear.
Great read! I’m glad you could fend off the trolls.
Even for Creative Commons licenses, there are copyright trolls that will get you for improper attribution. Some of the newer CC licenses have added language to be more forgiving and prevent that.
Cory Doctorow has several articles about CC attribution and especially Flickr. And, there’s hope! If you ever get trolled for messing up a Flickr attribution, you can get the troll kicked off of Flickr.
https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/01/pixsynnussija/#pilkunnussija
If you’re unsure of attribution, there are CC builders that will help
https://www.openwa.org/attrib-builder/
And this was a nice post showing the different levels of attribution.
https://librarianbyday.net/2009/09/28/how-to-attribute-a-creative-commons-photo-from-flickr/
Thank you–that’s really helpful, especially since Flickr is a suggested image source for Writer Unboxed bloggers.
Higbee and Associates are notorious copyright trolls here in the USA. They use reverese image searches scouring the internet for copyright infringement, and then they mass email copyright claim letters out to blog and website owners, seeking settlement money. For them it is a numbers game, as it costs them literally nothing to send out copyright claim emails, hoping to get people to respond to their email threats and give them financial settlement Unless it is a serious copyright infringement issue where a profit off a photo is made, most people can probably safely ignore their emails, as the likelihood of them filing a federal copyright lawsuit under most circumstances is relatively small.
What about LinkedIn? Sometimes I will copy a link and post to my linked in account( such as Lufthansa strike in Germany–and a picture of LH Plane will post). Is that considered copy right infringement??