Getty Images Demand Letter: What to Do (2026 Guide)

You open your mail and find a letter from Getty Images (or PicRights, or CopyTrack) demanding hundreds or thousands of euros for an image on your website. Your stomach drops.

Take a breath. You're not the first business owner this has happened to, and you won't be the last. Here is exactly what to do.

What the letter actually means

Getty Images and similar agencies use automated tools to scan the internet for their copyrighted photos. When they find one on your website without a valid license, they send a demand letter asking for compensation.

This is not a court summons. It is a claim for damages. But ignoring a copyright demand letter is a bad idea.

Typical amounts range from 500 to 5,000 euros per image, though some letters demand 10,000 euros or more. The amount they ask for is often negotiable. See our breakdown of how much a copyright claim actually costs for real settlement numbers.

Since the Getty Images and Shutterstock merger completed in 2025, enforcement has become more aggressive. The combined company has more resources, more images in its catalogue and more automated tools for finding unlicensed use. The number of demand letters sent to European small businesses has gone up.

How Getty Images finds your photos

You might wonder how Getty even knew your website had their image. It's not a coincidence and it's not random. Getty and its enforcement partners use several methods to find unlicensed images at scale.

Automated web crawlers. Getty operates crawlers that scan millions of websites continuously. These bots download images from public pages and compare them against Getty's catalogue. The process is entirely automated. No human is looking at your website. A bot found the match and triggered the demand letter.

Perceptual hashing and fingerprinting. Each image in Getty's library has a unique digital fingerprint, called a perceptual hash. Unlike a regular file hash that changes if you crop or resize an image, perceptual hashes identify the visual content regardless of changes. If you cropped the image, converted it to a different format, added a filter, or reduced the resolution, the fingerprint still matches. Even flipping the image horizontally won't fool it.

Reverse image search. Services like TinEye (which Getty has used as a partner) index billions of images and can find visually similar copies across the internet in seconds. Getty can upload their own photos and get a list of every website that uses them.

Web archive evidence. Even if you removed the image months ago, Getty may have already captured it. They use the Wayback Machine at web.archive.org and their own archival crawlers to document unauthorized use with timestamped screenshots. By the time the letter arrives, they already have proof.

The bottom line: if a Getty image is on a public page of your website, they will eventually find it. It's a matter of when, not if. That's why scanning your website for copyrighted images before enforcement agencies do is worth your time.

Step 1: Don't panic and don't pay immediately

The worst thing you can do is pay the full amount right away. The second worst thing is to ignore the letter completely.

Remove the image from your website first. This shows good faith and prevents the claim from growing. Don't just hide the page or unlink it. Delete the image file from your server or CMS media library entirely.

Step 2: Verify the claim

Before doing anything else, check whether the claim is legitimate:

• Is the image actually on your website (or was it)?
• Does Getty Images actually own the copyright?
• Do you have a license for this image?

Check your website's media library, your web designer's files, and any stock photo accounts you or your designer might have used. Sometimes the image was licensed, and the letter was sent in error.

How to check license databases. Start with the accounts most commonly used by web designers: Shutterstock, Adobe Stock, iStock (owned by Getty), and any freelance marketplaces like Envato. Log in to each account and search your download history. Most stock photo platforms keep a permanent record of every image you've downloaded and the license terms attached to it.

If your web designer handled the image, ask them for the license proof. A legitimate license will include a receipt or invoice, a license agreement specifying the permitted use, and the specific image ID that matches the one in the demand letter.

You can also do a reverse image search yourself. Go to Google Images, click the camera icon, and upload the image from the demand letter. This often reveals the original source. Compare the image ID from the search result with the one in your license records.

If you find a valid license, send a copy to Getty. The claim should be withdrawn. If the license was purchased under a different account or name, gather the documentation showing the connection between that account and your website. For more on verifying whether the letter itself is genuine, read our guide on whether CopyTrack, PicRights and Getty letters are legitimate.

Step 3: Check who put the image there

If your web designer chose the image, you may have a claim against them. Many web designers use unlicensed images without telling their clients.

This doesn't make the Getty claim go away, but it means you might be able to recover the cost from your designer. Check the contract you signed with them. If it includes a clause about providing properly licensed content, you have a stronger position. Read our full guide on web designer copyright liability to understand your options.

Timeline: how long do you have to respond?

Most Getty demand letters give you 14 to 30 days to respond. But the full escalation timeline typically looks like this:

Week 1-4: First demand letter. The initial letter arrives. It states the image, the URL where it was found, and the amount demanded. This is your best window to negotiate. Settlement amounts are lowest at this stage.

Week 6-10: Reminder letter. If you don't respond, a follow-up arrives. The tone is firmer. The amount usually stays the same but may include a note about escalation.

Month 3-4: Law firm letter. Getty or PicRights hands the case to a law firm. Now legal fees are added to the claim. The total typically jumps by 500 to 1,500 euros.

Month 5-6: Pre-litigation notice. A final warning before court proceedings. Interest has been accumulating from the date of the original letter.

Month 6-12: Court summons. If you still haven't responded, they file a claim. In the Netherlands this comes through a bailiff. You now face the original amount plus legal fees, court costs and interest.

The message is clear: respond early. Every month you wait, the cost goes up and your negotiating position gets weaker.

Step 4: Respond to the letter

Do not ignore the letter. Contact Getty Images (or the agency that sent it) and:

• Confirm you've removed the image
• Ask for proof of copyright ownership
• If the amount seems excessive, negotiate. Many businesses settle for 30-50% of the original demand

If the amount is above 1,000 euros, consider getting legal advice. A lawyer experienced with copyright claims can often negotiate a lower settlement.

Step 5: Prevent it from happening again

This is where most business owners stop. Don't make that mistake.

• Check all images on your website
• Ask your web designer where every image came from
• Use properly licensed stock photos. Our guide to free stock photo sources covers Unsplash, Pexels, Pixabay and other options that are safe for commercial use
• Keep records of all image licenses
• Run a scan to check for other issues

What NOT to do

• Don't ignore the letter hoping it goes away. It won't. Agencies escalate to legal proceedings.
• Don't delete the image and pretend nothing happened. They already have evidence.
• Don't pay the full amount without negotiating. The first number is rarely the final number.
• Don't admit fault in writing without legal advice.

How much will it cost?

The amount you pay depends on when you respond, what the image is, and how it was used. Here is a breakdown of typical ranges.

| Stage | Typical cost per image | Notes | |---|---|---| | Early settlement (within 30 days) | 300 - 800 EUR | Best outcome. You respond quickly, remove the image, negotiate in good faith. | | Settlement after reminder | 500 - 1,500 EUR | You missed the first deadline but engaged before lawyers got involved. | | Settlement after law firm letter | 1,000 - 3,000 EUR | Legal fees have been added. Your negotiating position is weaker. | | Court judgment | 2,000 - 5,000 EUR | Original claim plus opposing legal fees, court costs and interest. | | Court judgment (with your own lawyer) | 3,000 - 8,000 EUR | Add your own legal representation costs. | | Multiple images (5+) at early stage | 200 - 500 EUR per image | Bulk settlements often bring the per-image cost down significantly. |

These are typical ranges for a standard stock photo used on a small business website. High-value editorial photographs or images used in advertising campaigns can command higher amounts.

The pattern is consistent: the earlier you deal with it, the less it costs. For a detailed analysis of settlement amounts by agency and country, read our full cost breakdown guide.

What if the image was on your site years ago but is now removed?

This is one of the most common questions we hear. You removed the image a year ago, maybe two. Then a letter arrives demanding payment for it. Is the claim still valid?

Usually, yes. Copyright claims don't expire just because you removed the image. The agencies documented the unauthorized use when the image was still live. They have timestamped screenshots and web archive records as proof.

What matters is the statute of limitations in your country:

• Netherlands: 5 years from when the copyright holder discovered the infringement
• Germany: 3 years from the end of the calendar year they gained knowledge
• Belgium: 5 years from the date of the infringing act
• United Kingdom: 6 years from the date of infringement
• Austria: 3 years from date of knowledge

In practice, if you used a Getty image on your website any time in the last 3-5 years, a claim is likely still within the limitation period. If the image was removed five or more years ago and the agency is only contacting you now, you may have a valid defense. But you need to actually raise this defense in your response. It doesn't apply automatically.

The fact that you already removed the image voluntarily can work in your favour during settlement negotiations. It shows good faith, even though it doesn't cancel the claim for the period the image was live.

Getty vs CopyTrack vs PicRights: what's the difference?

If your letter came from CopyTrack or PicRights rather than Getty directly, you might wonder who you're actually dealing with and whether the claim carries the same weight. Here is a quick comparison.

Getty Images is the copyright holder. They own the images (or represent the photographers who do). Getty sends demand letters directly through their own enforcement team and also works through agents like PicRights. Since the Shutterstock merger, their catalogue and enforcement reach have expanded significantly.

PicRights is an enforcement agent based in Switzerland. They act on behalf of copyright holders including Getty Images, AFP, Reuters and individual photographers. When PicRights sends you a letter, they're collecting on someone else's behalf. Their claims are legally identical to a direct claim from the copyright holder. PicRights has won cases in courts across Europe.

CopyTrack is a Berlin-based platform. Photographers upload their images, and CopyTrack's software finds unauthorized copies on the web. CopyTrack works on commission, keeping a percentage of whatever they collect. Their demands tend to be somewhat lower than Getty's, but the claims are equally enforceable.

All three are legitimate. A letter from CopyTrack or PicRights carries the same legal weight as one from Getty directly. The response strategy is the same regardless of which company sent the letter. For more on verifying the sender, read our guide on whether CopyTrack, PicRights and Getty letters are legitimate.

Frequently asked questions

Can Getty Images really sue me for one photo?

Yes. Copyright holders have the legal right to claim damages for unauthorized use of their work. Courts in the Netherlands and across the EU consistently uphold these claims. The Getty-Shutterstock merger hasn't changed the law, but it has given them more resources to pursue smaller claims.

My web designer put the image there. Am I still responsible?

You are responsible for the content on your website. However, you may have a claim against your web designer for the costs you incur. Check your contract with them. Our guide on web designer copyright liability covers this in detail.

What if I bought the image from a stock photo site?

If you have a valid license, send proof to Getty Images. The claim should be withdrawn. If the license was purchased under a different account or by your designer, gather that documentation. The license needs to cover the specific use case on your website.

How do I know if other images on my site have the same problem?

Run a free scan on your website. Our scanner checks for stock photo CDN patterns, watermarked images, and known copyright agency URLs across your entire site. You can also scan your website for copyrighted images using our step-by-step guide.

Is CopyTrack or PicRights the same as Getty Images?

CopyTrack and PicRights are agencies that collect damages on behalf of copyright holders, including Getty Images. The claims are equally valid and should be treated the same way. If you're unsure whether the letter you received is genuine, read our guide on whether CopyTrack, PicRights and Getty letters are legitimate.

I found the image on Google. Doesn't that make it free to use?

No. Google Images is a search engine, not a free image library. Every image in Google search results has a copyright holder. Finding an image through Google gives you zero rights to use it. This is one of the most common misunderstandings that leads to demand letters.

Can I crop or edit the image to avoid detection?

No. Getty's fingerprinting technology identifies images regardless of cropping, resizing, colour changes, filters, or format conversion. Perceptual hashing matches the visual content, not the file data. Editing the image doesn't make it undetectable and doesn't change the fact that you used it without a license.

What if I credited the photographer? Does that help?

Giving credit is polite, but it's not a substitute for a license. Copyright law requires permission (usually in the form of a purchased license), not attribution. The photographer deserves both credit and payment. Adding a photo credit line under an unlicensed image doesn't protect you from a claim.

---

Don't wait for the next letter. If you got one demand for an unlicensed image, there may be more on your site. Scan your website now to find copyright risks before enforcement agencies do. Free, no signup, takes two minutes.