Copyright trolling and speculative invoicing are back in fashion, thanks to tools that can match images and automate the creation of claims of infringement. This has been going on for a while, so it is not too surprising that ORG has received a demand from PicRights, concerning the reproduction of a Facebook ad.

They claim that this reproduction of an image in an advert infringes a copyright. This is a business model which relies on them asking for a sum of £400, in the hope that the recipient doesn’t take legal advice and just pays up. As legal advice might easily cost a larger sum, many recipients will simply pay up.

In our case, the image falls under fair dealing, as it is used for criticism and review. We explain this in a letter we have sent to them, which we are publishing in case others fall foul of this kind of practice. Others have apparently ignored them, or offered lower sums of money.

More widely, PicRights and speculative invoicing bring copyright into disrepute. They are not a legal firm. They do not represent the copyright holder directly, but rather they have bought a licence to chase other people for payment. By failing to check if the recipient may have a legitimate defence, and failing to mention the existence of defences, they hope to frighten people into payment.

The legal system should be able to stop activities like this, where companies regularly issue bullying or unfounded requests. Reputation management companies indulge in similar activities, similarly often without genuine legal foundations to their demands. Yet currently, there is no means to fine such companies or otherwise stop this behaviour.

We are aware of at least one other organisation who has recently received a similar letter from another company and wishes to respond: if you are a lawyer and willing to help with their dispute, please email us and we will put you in touch.