Sadly they have loopholes that prevent them from being sued. Stuff like "we're not responsible for what our store owners put on their stores" and all that legalese that gives them a legal way out. It's crap and unfair, but if you're going to sell on a platform like that, you have to do all you can to protect yourself...
might be better to do exactlywhat t he. ig boyz do: Create a legal fiction like an LLC incorporation. Thiseay zero consequencesto her personal life money. Simply declare bankrupty and dissolve the legal function of the LLC and presto! nobody goes to jail nor pays any money back! 😊👍💯
Copyright means NOTHING! I am a professional photographer and one of the big PODs took over 30 of my copyrighted photos and for a year and a half they sold the photos on 1500 items. Open and shut case right? Nope. It wasn't a user who uploaded the photos, the company was to blame. I spent a fortune and lost almost everything fighting them. Lawyers suck and the justice system is broken. Then Covid slowed the whole process down. If you want an attorney to go to court, be prepared to pay $200K upfront. Otherwise you will have an attorney like mine who threw me under the bus to take a quick settlement. This company did horrible things to get even with me and pulled every legal trick they could think of. It was an awful experience and I no longer want to be an artist.
We need some sort of artist's guild that we can pay into and have them advocate and take care of lawsuits on our behalf. That's the only way artists will ever be able to fight back against companies who do this. What company was it, btw? I want to avoid ever using or supporting them.
That's horrible,which is why it's so funny how this lady's store got hit but MAJOR ones didn't,like even in my country you see alot of ILLEGALLY COPYRIGHTED artwork being sold in MAJOR STORES but no one says anything about it ??? Sorry to hear that man
We don't have a justice system... we have a corrupt and broken legal system. As far as the woman in the video, Our U.S. constitution says "No cruel and unusual punishments". Fining anyone $250k over $380, especially when that woman probably doesn't even make that 250k amount before taxes in 3-4 years, is incredibly "cruel". It impoverishes and would have kept her destitute for years. The judge who approved the fine should be disbarred.
Luke Combs went above and beyond for this woman. I hope she understands not just how lucky she is to escape the legal issues but how amazing of a person Luke Combs is to give her the proceeds. Wow.
What Luke Combs did for that woman was above and beyond most peoples character. He was the bigger person, and he made things right with her and the whole situation.
@@Sm00th-0perator probably not, because nobody would have known about it... I don't know, some people complain about things being all over social media, but for me, even at 47, I'm trying to even remember how we every knew about anything before social media!??? Of course we managed, but as far as having any hope of a music star, or celeb getting info about us, and reaching out like that so quickly... There's no way.. So many things are possible now that never were before.. I do realize they aren't all good, but mostly..
He easily deflected a pr disaster, and got frankly more than 250K worth of Brand recognition and increased the brands positive associations by doing this.
@@fromthehorsesmouth3790 Because something like this despite it being legal or not paints the celebrity in a bad light. Makes it look like the celebrities are turning their back on their fans. Besides the example shown in the video, also remember the huge backlash that Metallica got long ago with the whole Napster fiasco.
@@willn8664The Napster stuff was particularly dumb. Right before the crackdown on filesharing the industry had the best year it's ever had. But, afterwards the market fell pretty quickly. I personally have never bought more albums than when I was pirating off of Napster. Of the albums I have at least half of them were purchased during the period where I was pirating. In the case of Metallica, they should have tried being better musicians. The whole thing looked extremely bad when they were suing for large sums of money under various questionable theories like "making available" and having the law changed so that they didn't have to prove damages.
Not long ago, I had to take down & modify a design featuring Rudolph the reindeer, after learning that any reindeer with a red nose is trademarked. It's super easy to sell something illegal without even realizing it.
wtf? how can they trademark a reindeer with a red nose? It baffles me to the stupidity of the law system that allows certain things as such to be trademarked.
if we're honest - most people don't care about that law - that's why it happens but the platform shouldn't allow it! If they do (like Etsy) they should be the ones standing in court. Regardless, as sellers, it's our responsibility to do our proper research. People think just because it's Etsy you can sell anything. If people would have learned the meaning of the word "brand" they may have put some extra thought and effort to what they sell on the platform.
YES!!! 💯 Amazon, Redbubble, Zazzle all of them!! If we start holding them accountable because they’re allowing this to go on within their infrastructure, I agree shops would get shut down so fast. I also say shame on the buyers for buying the copyright infringement ! You’re telling me people buy Disney stuff on Etsy and have no idea that the seller shouldn’t be selling Disney stuff? Please 🙄
Infringement is no joke! -- She did something illegal, but to sue her for that amount of money is just insane. I'm glad he is a good and compassionate person! She is a very lucky woman. Lesson learned...I hope!
I was considering print on demand a few years ago and watched lots of videos, including quite a few of yours, and one of the first things you learn is not to breach copyright! There is often a bit of work involved looking up trademarks and copyrights for phrases, but using a celebrities image and name is just asking for trouble. I am surprised when you look at some of these POD sites that there are so many products featuring characters from things like Star Wars. You just know at some point the hammer is going to come down hard!
So now people get rewarded for breaking the law. They should have just made her take the merchandise down. But he rewarded for doing wrong, breaking the law. She not a victim. This generation as lost its way, like no other generation in life. This is a every is a victim generation and they want everything easy, willing to break the law and then get rewarded for breaking the law. I'm in the retail busy and this is sicking to me.!!!
If you are creating original fan art of IP and using it, some IP holders make an exception for that, but it's up to the artist to make sure it's ok. This chick is just a straight up thief who doesn't look like she was 'creating' anything.
@@londonstar3657 I agree. The penalty for Copyright Infringement can include time in a Federal Prison as well. He should have at least let her spend some time in prison. There needs to be some sort of accountability for people who flagrantly break the law.
$250K is excessive. I think the biggest issue was Illinois passed a law saying you could email a summons to court, instead of physically hand it to someone, which used to be law to make sure everyone stuff like this doesn't happen. So the summons ended up in her junkmail. Meaning she missed her court date, missed her chance to argue her case, and probably looked in the eyes of the court delinquent and contemptuous, so why give her a break. All the wrong things happened for her, but hopefully will provide guidance to the Illinois legal system to go back to physical summons in the future.
its still prolly illegal to summons into Court that way, as it is not expected in our customary legal legacy… just like the stupid face coverings, “ZOOM” -tv trials which severely impede the defendants their rights to fully face their accuser in real life as this impedes the jury from properly assessing the defendant etc in normal, customary human interaction and facial clues @@WholesaleTed
$250,000 is not excessive. It is the LAW! You can additionally be required to do time in a Federal Prison for Copyright Infringement. She is very lucky she is not sitting in prison for the next 5-10 years.
And also scammers. My Etsy store was taken down because another seller filed copyright infringement on ALL of my products/designs. Designs that took me countless hours to create. Etsy shut down my store. They said to fight against it I’d have to go to court with the accuser. I was a small shop. How in the hell would I afford court and an attorney? Etsy is a shit store with shit policies. They don’t protect anyone.
Well.... there are certain youtubers who tell people "make insane amounts of money by not re-inventing the wheel! just take top-selling ideas, change them slightly and win big!" ...... they will never get in trouble for it
Real lesson here: get your sob story to go viral and you dont have to be penalized for breaking the law. We see it plenty. While 250k was excessive for a small shop, she knew it was illegal (or at least not right).
@@ForceFreeTrainergirl06 That wouldn't make it ok. She was just straight up selling drop shipped items with stolen images on them and calling it 'hand made'. She's a bottom feeding thief and liar, the sort that are ruining platforms for small creators.
Copyright is a wicked thing to get involved in. I was part of a group of people who would share movies with each other, it was like our own little movie club. There were about 25 people in our group. One day, I got a knock at the door, and it was a federal marshall who was sent to serve me with papers. It turns out someone shared a movie with a lawyer who then proceeded to sue all of us in the group. The amount they were asking knocked me out... A whopping $8 Million dollars. I hired an attorney and then found out that my only options were to pay the amount or file for bankruptcy. So bankruptcy it was.
@@freudulant I'm assuming it was torrents of movies. Somebody (or bodies) in the group most likely didn't own some amount of the movies that were being shared that opened them up to the lawsuit.
@@Matthias129 Yes, because as much as the studios hate sharing DVDs, there's nothing they can do about it legally, so long as it's an original copy of the DVD that was properly purchased by somebody.
driven by opportunistic lawyers, you cant even use numbers today, try printing 23, MJ owns the trade mark, infact very few numbers up to 100 are available for free use. amazing. next will be letters >.
Copyright is copyright. When does it end and what is acceptable. All social media is flooded with copyright infringement. The sooner the social media accepts responsibility for what they publish the better. They have the resources to help stamp it out.
Wow, Nicol's experience is truly a wake-up call for all print on demand sellers. It's clear that understanding and abiding by the law is non-negotiable in this business. Thank you for sharing and educating us on how to avoid such costly mistakes. This video should be a must-watch for anyone in the print on demand industry!
Agreed. It’s hard to imagine how you could think it’s okay to sell things with someone else’s image on them. One would think common sense would tell you this isn’t okay.
@@Financiallyfreeauthor Indeed. Whether she did research on copyright law, I do not know, but it's easy to make a mistake in that world. We all make mistakes in life, but I am glad the outcome was a blessing in the end.
some people laterally have ZERO creativity and that is not some exaggerated claim its just how their brain works. they only think in terms of what's popular and can make money. they might have aesthetic and designs skills to make strategic choices when coming up with a product. but they cant create anything of their own
That’s very sweet of Luke and you understand he’s a human with a heart but it’s not his job to protect this woman. Honestly it really the job of the website to take down stuff too… it sucks but it’s a life lesson when coming into this kind of work. Anyway it’s a lovely story and she got super duper lucky with the help of the push of the media too.
I am 99% sure she knew it was illegal. She surely knew she was risking her store. But I still sympathize with her shock with the lawsuit: that was VERY surprising!
Sometimes, IP attorneys will make an example of someone violating IP rights, thus the $250k lawsuit. It definitely gets attention. Ignorance of the law does not absolve her from responsibility.
It is important to understand the risks involved in using other people's original work to make a profit. Many online users around the world try to make money by selling products with quotes, images of celebrities or other well-known figures, and artwork created by others without giving proper credit. This issue is not limited to Etsy but also happens on other platforms. However, taking someone else's work without permission is illegal and can result in serious consequences. Unfortunately, most original artists do not have the resources or time to track down people who use their work for profit. But just because owners don't always look around doesn't mean they won't sue either. Make a name for yourself and create your own design or they can get a license to sell (If its possible).
I have a super hard time believing people who go into business selling anything don't have a basic concept and understanding of copyright! To say she didn't know is a hard one to swallow. Educate yourself, it is everywhere if you want to learn, do your research. But I agree, so many copyright products on etsy making a fortune! I don't understand why Etsy doesn't shut them down without waiting for the company to come after them. It isn't fair to those of us following the rules and doing things legitimately. Luke was extremely considerate in her case! I hope she truly grasps what he did for her. Above and beyond.
Its so easy to use images these days that are not copyright, along with AI to create images. Even if you aren't super creative and artistic! I just cannot conceive how people think they are going to get away with someone else's copyright such as a famous person. It seems so much like basic common sense to me.
And she tried to call them 'hand made tumblers' when they are just drop shipped tumblers decorated with not just stolen IP but the images are stolen. If she was an actual artist putting drawings of famous people on drop shipped merch, I would be more sympathetic, but she's nothing but a bottom feeder.
I think Etsy and other print-on-demand sites don't get as tough about listing items because if they do sell and there isn't an issue with the seller, then they make $$. It seems like they're all more of the let's see if we can get away with it until we can't anymore type businesses (the POD marketplaces like Etsy, Amazon, Redubble, etc.} I'm sure she thought it would be quick $$ and seeing all those others on Etsy gave her the green light so to speak to add her designs, but again, knowing what you're selling, etc. is the top priority of print-on-demand and designing. The best advice I can give is if it's a person, living or deceased, there's probably a copyright or trademark in place. If you're copying designs, it very well could be illegal as well. People don't even realize fonts can be subject to copyright infringement so business owners need to know what they're doing. She's very lucky she was treated so kindly by Luke Combs and it was likely due to the fact she was on the news and posted on TikTok gaining attention from others. Had she not, he probably never would've even known it was an issue. As he said he has a company go after copyright infringement issues for him. It's always better to be safe than sorry.
It's easy to understand why Etsy doesn't shut down copyright infringers. Why would they spend time and money putting together systems and expensive expert staff to do that when Etsy are not liable for the infringement?
I hope you are feeling much better! I missed this video because I also have Covid. Thanks for staying on top of these issues. It is surprising to me that Amazon and Etsy don't have any liability, but it is a great warning for any seller out there. As a business person, you are responsible for staying on top of the legal issues that impact your business, including following the terms of service of the platforms on which you choose to sell. Combs is a stand up person and was really nice to do this, but this is not to be expected. Just sell your own original creations.
She said that the lawsuit went to her junk mail. Email is not a legal means for these kinds of notifications in the US. She received real paperwork at some point and ignored it.
I think she should’ve got sued. I think it was very nice of him to get the lawsuit dropped, and get her money released on Etsy, but no reward her for it. He should have also said, folks, don’t do it. He basically encouraged as far as I’m concerned, copyright infringement for the little guy. People, don’t do it!
It's interesting. In editing, I cut out a section of the video where I commented that his response might now encourage this sort of thing. I thought I was getting boring so cut it. But in his full unedited video (I cut it down for brevity) he says things like, "no fan should ever be sued" and, well, these "fans" are also running businesses too, and these businesses are infringing on your IPs, and so they are going to get closed down by your legal department, even if they are "fans" - and so saying no fan should get "sued" people may take this to mean they can do this, when they cannot. And then get a rude reminder when, even if they don't get sued, they still get their store banned. I don't think he understands what exactly was going on, I get the feeling he woke up, saw the drama and didn't realize that there is a whole multi-billion dollar industry of cottage/small POD stores and just thought it was a small thing.
@@WholesaleTedthat’s interesting. I agree that he may not understand the ramifications of what he has said. It’s so much harder for very small designers to do anything about IP infringement. How are small businesses and hobby artists supposed to do anything about other small businesses and hobbyists copying our designs and making a profit from it. And how is the customer supposed to know who designed it first…. It’s really frustrating 😢
@@cameronpollock That is the easiest way to loose trademarks. He already opened a can of worms by admitting here is a two tier approach to his trademarks and copyrights.
From what I have gathered is, if it is a company logo like Budweiser, Nascar, Harley Davidson or names and photos of someone famous, it’s probably a no no if you’re planning on selling it.
He has the legal right to protect his brand. I see copyright stuff all over the internet and TikTok is filled with it, the list goes on. Everyone thinks this a big joke, she acted in terms of a scalper benefiting off of his brand...STEALING basically. He acted in a good nature to resolve the issue. She just learn the hard way on something that is free knowledge.
I get annoyed when I see people using celebrities and such in their shop. It is so hard to come up with something people want to buy (also market it) and these guys just take the easy way out. I don't think she should have to pay $250,000 though, unless the person continues to use other copyrighted items (which I don't she would in this case). I think a cease and desist is enough and just pay them what you made off the tumblers. That's fair.
There almost certainly were cease and desist letters to which she did not respond. There was a lawsuit to which she did not respond and she ended with 250k default judgement,
@@HoDLum that would be weird because the first step in those cases is a copyright infringement notice thru whatever POD, there would be internal notices in her account that she needs to take whatever down because whomever is claiming to own the rights, she would have seen those when logging in to upload something else, besides a copy for her email, so it seems they jumped straight to suing a bundle of sellers because there are people who actively pursue this type of thing and just call rights holders offering to sue for them.
@@HoDLum Oh there was > 4:27 shows copy a of the cease and desist that she says "went to her spam folder". If you are running a business, you should be checking that spam folder daily to make sure nothing important slips by.
who says there was not a cease and desist letter? And if she responded to the lawsuit instead of pretending she found out about the judgement from a spam box email, she could have negotiated 5 or 10k settlement.
Record companies have crazy contracts with their artists. They ‘own’ the artists’ intellectual property/image. At this point, Luke Combs himself can’t make and sell a tumbler with his own image on it without permission from his record company!
dang, lessons to learn. So many people selling stuff that is copywritten and trademarked. people need to get a bit of an education before doing this kind of stuff. Thanks for putting this out there. I have been doing POD for about 5 years and always careful to check stuff out first. They should have sent a Ceast and desist letter first too.
Completely agree, but in her case she's like I don't understand, what did I do wrong? Ignorance isn't an excuse for doing something illegal, some people should really have some sense when doing POD and such.
I think, when I start selling merchandise, I will copy right everything I design and wait til I receive the copy right letter before uploading the design.
YES! Do that! Technically (if I'm not mistaken), you have up to 90 days AFTER first publishing your original work to register your work with the copyright office (in the US) and still be able to sue any infringer for up to $150,000 per infringement. I believe nowadays you can register original works in batches of 10 pieces for about $80 (?). So registering periodically in batches is a good practice.
In this case it wasn't Etsy, it was Amazon, but they both have the same policy: they don't take down infringing items unless the IP holder enforces their rights. They are under no legal requirement currently to take them down. I don't think it is right, I think they should have filters in-place to warn people that their item might be infringing on IPs. RU-vid has that system in-place, it warns you when you upload a video, and it protects RU-vidrs from uploading videos not eligible for monetization. This could protect sellers from making a mistake like this.
This illustrates the broken legal system in the U.S.. While what she did may have been wrong, we must also realize the constitution says "No cruel and unusual punishments". Fining anyone $250,000 over $380, especially when that person probably doesn't even make that 250k amount before taxes in 3-4 years, is incredibly "cruel". It impoverishes them and will keep them destitute for years. The judge who approved the fine should be disbarred.
I'm sorry, but she was wrong. Too many people think that they will not go after the little guys. I put my stuff in a craft store for a while this year. Even the owner was selling copyrighted/trademarked items along with a lot of the other artisans/crafters in the store. When I asked the owner about it, she said they're not going to worry about her store; they only go after the big guys. This attitude only encourages this to continue. I turn down work when someone asks me to do anything that is copyright infringement. One such potential client thought I would do it since I am a home-based business. It may have been a large sum of money for this woman, but I feel this woman is not getting penalized at all for her actions. And I think Luke Combs put out a message that it is okay to do this sort of thing if you are a small business! And don't you sign an agreement with Etsy (and the new Michael's Marketplace) that you will not sell these types of items? Isn't that a breach of contract in itself? Thanks for letting me sound off.
I once had a person ask me (as a photographer and Photoshop enthusiast) to upsize/retouch a digital file of a painting from a living painter (so not a 'public domain' art piece) and have it printed super large for him to display in his home! The nerve people have is unreal. Of course I declined. Someone else with no morals might have done it. But Ethics is my middle name.
The 3D printed items I sell at local toy stores and comic shops all require I provide proof I have the right to sell those items. I like that they are keeping me honest and keeping the riffraff out of the store.
What a great guy! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 But, I have a question - - Don’t Etsy and Amazon have some responsibility for allowing these items to be sold on their platforms? I know Patreon and RU-vid are really strict with what they will and will not allow bc they don’t want to be sued. They take things down and suspend people all the time.
These big companies don't care as long as they get their fees from the seller. They can afford lawyers to write the best policy rules to cover their backs and wash their hands. These companies get their share of the money, and they're as guilty as the sellers. They should also be sued. And 250K is something that you'd ask a company to pay, like Etsy or Amazon, but not a small shop. The judge has shown poor judgment, sorry.
@@jdg4112 I agree with everything you said. Etsy and Amazon know what's being uploaded and should be sued. AI is out now and can detect any copyrighted image. I wish people wouldn't sue because it's a compliment for someone to copy their stuff BUT I understand the loss of profit and not crediting the original designer, person etc..
These platforms take down content when they receive a DMCA request, and are under no obligation to do more. Forcing every platform to implement a pre-emptive, automated Content ID-style system would be a bad idea, because Content ID sometimes doesn't work very well.
No empathy for this person or any other person that sells items that they do not own the rights to for selling purposes. Totally agree Sarah, she should have used her talents for legally selling merchandise that does not break any copyright laws.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse when you own a business. Luke did a wonderful thing but he's now set the precedent for unscrupulous sellers to to use Copyright/Trademark images in hopes that they too will end up with a good, kindhearted, sympathetic celebrity to stand up for them.
$250,000 is absurd. You can't get money from people who don't have it. The amount isn't even justified. Thank you, Luke Combs for being a compassionate human being. I don't understand why lawyers have to act like monsters.
Rudy Giuliani Mr. Tramp's attorney ordered to pay $180 Million to election people, the order came from a Judge. If he does not pay, they can go after his car, his house, his bank account, his assets you name it. I do no know if you remember Napster. Metallica went after the owners of Napster website and end up in court and the Copyright Violators end up in deep water. The lawsuit put the culprit out of business and had to pay plenty of dollars to the victims. Before becoming a POD guru, or seller or merchant or vendor or speculator, take a class on Copyright, Trademark and Patent laws and their penalties. 4 years in jail and $250,000 United States Dollars if convicted.
Presumably, a lot of that was statutory damages. Although, in this case she should have had the necessary books to figure out just how much to award the plaintiff.
These people who sell items with copyrighted images are ridiculous when they get caught. Usually saying "poor me, I didn't know it was copyrighted". Not to mention she layered a bunch of stickers, most likely also copyrighted, and made a sublimation print for a tumbler.
Wow, this girl got really, really lucky, I think we can all agree. That could have gone either way for sure, and Luke was very human about the whole thing. Create your own stuff, people! There are enough ideas for everyone. PS Sarah, get well soon and watch your iron and electrolyte levels as Covid can zap both. I didn’t know, but friends took one look at me (pale as a ghost and dizzy) and figured it out. Wishing perfect health to all this holiday season 💚
I see tons of copyright violations on etsy. Amazon too. Even silicone molds that I can't verify are properly licensed to be made. So, I can't buy them to make products from because I don't want to risk getting sued.
Why be a sheep? It's not because everyone else is infringing on copyrights left and right that she too should fall for it! As a business owner, she should know about copyrights and trademarks. One single breach of a copyright can be up to $150,000. Personally, as a photographer, I'm so tired of people who think because an image is shown online, that it's fair game and belongs to everyone and they can appropriate said image and do whatever they want with it in a commercial setting (ie make money off of it). WRONG.That's why for photographers and artists in the United States, it is recommended to periodically register your original work with the US Copyright Office. Because if you have to sue an infringer, the judgement amount will be considerably more if your work is registered than if it's not. So no, I don't feel sorry for this woman. She was very lucky that Luke Combs was so understanding and even generous. I hope she did learn her lesson. Come on people, show a little creativity instead of stealing other people's work or fame!
I think it's great that stories like this go viral so awareness can spread. I do think the fine did not fit the violation in that persons tumbler case, but I also don't expect legal system to go through the process of trying to figure out the value of every violation. And I would not expect them to know if some seemingly small Etsy store is not actually being backed by some larger multinational multibillion dollar company.
If that legal system is putting a dollar amount on the violation, it has the responsibility of knowing the worth of what was taken. It's why it has distinguished petty from grand larceny. Again though, I think the whole business of it needs to become more streamlined, consistent, and layperson-friendly. I like the idea of people posting specifically what of their content or imagery they will and won't allow you to use. For the average person, a simple warning will suffice.
Yeah, you can't DO that. When in doubt, just imagine if someone were to sell YOUR face for a profit without your permission. You can't use someone's image without licensing, period. I mean, I too want to publish that Kardashian adult coloring book, but I don't want to be sued into next Tuesday.
He can't drop the lawsuit, because it was already completed, and she probably sign away accepting herself as guilty. you can't just drop what is signed, it has to go through new court, new judge, new case, etc which is gonna cost more. Beside he doesn't get a choice to call off anything, because like most celebrity, it is the company that owns them.
I want to know how they were able to get a judgement against her without her even knowing about it. This is bogus crap or she is not telling the whole story. You have to get notice from the Sheriff's office of the action against you and you have to be sued in your own jurisdictin so you can appear to defend yourself. TOTAL BS....
Thanks so much for sharing this in such detail with your following! You are amazing and stick to the facts letting your following make educated business decisions.
Absolutely not, she did something wrong she should pay back the amount she made. I think she learned her lesson. It was genuinely nice of Luke Combs to handle the situation as he did.
Rockstarflipper just made a video about this story as well! While they didn't need to sue her for that much, I think what LC did just is going to encourage all the people who are doing copyright infringement, honestly. Like, it's SO rampant on places like RedBubble, etc,makes me sick. Sure it's easy money at first, but it's illegal, and not worth the risk! Cause companies/famous people CAN come after you! Just use your imagination, or outsource!
It's about time they are doing something about this. it will make it so that those of us who are actually artist or graphic designers a fair chance at making sales for a change.
This is why everything I make and sell I pay royalties for the right to sell. But I have a hard time selling licensed products against the shade tree producers that are selling the products cheaper. But im also not worried about getting sued either. The worst thing I’ve ever had happen is WB sent me a cease and desist on some custom 3D printed wands I designed, printed and sold advertised as magic wands. I was able, remarkably, to clear the issue up. I provided links to the ads, detailed photos of the wands and even sent a few wands for examination. Didn’t have to go to court or thankfully retain a lawyer but I was worried for a while.
Hi Sara, yes She made a real rooky mistake here, probably didn't think it through. It is a bit of a minefield with copyright laws, but this guy Luke Coombs has a real heart, she is very lucky that he responded. Any way have a Great Christmas Sara and hope you get well soon. Take zinc ,vitamin D & C and take a look at the stuff they give Horses. HAHA !! Cheers from the land of OZ !
I’m glad Luke is helping her out with this while also setting the this is not a green light to use my image. Hopefully she serves as a cautionary tale and can recover. Also you are recovering from COVID like a champ most would look like a zombie you don’t. Feel better soon!
I pray you are feeling much better now. As to Nicole's situation, I believe that this is done as a matter of principal, this story was seen by a lot of people, now sellers are aware. Do your homework and do it right to avoid huge losses.
Exactly why we have a utility patent. We didn’t work for years so that others could come and steal it for their own benefit. Instead we let people create their own designs while we sell, personalize and ship for you. This is what licensing is for and more. Usually, you can only be sued for what you earned.
I doubt it was even a profit of $380... my guess is that was the revenue. She is printing them at-home so that will improve her profit margins, but it was probably still not quite $300
I have sold on Amazon and if you are selling something you should NOT be selling, the brand will contact you. Either by email or letter in the mail. If you do not remove or take down…then the brand will move forward to sue you. I see A LOT of people who “think” these letters are from other sellers or just not real. I bet she got one, didn’t understand and then…boom sued.
Hard way to learn, but I think she knows now that you can't put a famous person on your amazon tumbler...It's common sense, but a lesson well learnt for this woman. Very lucky and well done Luca for his kindness.
Is it me or was this poor lady wearing a knockoff Miami Dolphins t-shirt in her interview? It didn’t look on brand for the NFL. If so, she clearly doesn’t understand about copyright. I hope someone helps her.
Some people just aren't cut out to be business owners. She needs to get a job with a legit company where THEY can concern themselves with the legalities.
I heard about the story. My answer to this is yes, or no, but we don't know the whole story. I also have heard that she has lots of things that she has violating copyright infringement. I know for at least trademark infringement they send a ceased, and assist letter and tell people to remove things from the shop. Which we don't know if she already had those letters sent to her. Asked for $250,000.... That's a steep fee, they could've just had her shut her shop down and give the money that she made. And ban her from selling on there platform. They may also I've been trying to use her as an example, because so many people are doing it. The bottom line is you cannot make money off someone else's brand, personality, etc. without getting officially licensed and paying royalties. I'm going through the process with the trademark attorney right now getting officially licensed to sell a product using someone's name on it. And I will have to pay royalties of 10% of my profit.. That's the law! Get the license and then you won't have these problems!!!! She did this to herself.
No, I don't agree with this. A warning first, yes. And if she refused to take them down then legal action should've been taken. But not without warning! Bless this man's heart, boy was she lucky!!
she shouldnt be the one sued, it should be etsy for allowing this, its nice of him to offer to help her, im sure it took a lot of stress out of her life, given her horrible situation, i hope everyone can learn from her .
I'm not a big music follower, but that guy has just earned my total respect. WoW! Honestly, I am surprised she didn't fight back because in order to be sued, they have to prove they served you and you got it, and she had a right to be heard. she could have went to the court and filed to overturn the judgement because she wasn't served. Good resolution all the way around.
As they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse. Personally I still don't understand how sites like Etsy are not charged. The get a cut and charge fees for the listing. So, they do make a lot of money from sales like this. Is it in some indemnity or indemnify clause that they get off scot-free as well?
It's been tried in court and the ultimate answer is that if user-generated websites like Etsy were required to vet all content through their websites, then it would be literally impossible for them to exist. Therefore, the burden has been taken off of them. What is interesting though is that RU-vid will go to a lot more effort to scan your video & warn you of infringing material in it that could get you demonetized. Etsy & Amazon could do a similar thing: they could have AI that warns you that parts of your listing may be infringing on IPs. It was obvious when this Tumbler was uploaded it was infringing on Luke Combs. Amazon could have warned her before submitting it as he is a huge music star. But they don't, and you're right, they benefit financially from it too.
@@WholesaleTed, so true about the amount being put up on those sites and the effort it would take to "police" all the postings. Keep up to good work, love the new reporting.
