Higbee & Associates (and others) and the Copyright Demand Letter Industry

You used an image on your website. Now you have a demand letter.

Higbee & Associates, Copycat Legal, PicRights, and firms like them have built a business around one simple premise: most people who receive a copyright demand letter will pay something to make it go away. They send hundreds — in some cases thousands — of demand letters every year, typically over photographs pulled from Google or other online sources and placed on websites without a license. The letters arrive with large numbers and short deadlines. They are designed to generate fear, not to accurately reflect your legal exposure.

If you received one of these letters, you should not ignore it. You should also not pay it before you understand what you are actually facing.

How Copyright Works Here

When a photographer takes a picture, copyright attaches immediately. If you copied that image from the internet and put it on your website or social media page without a license, you may have infringed it. That is the straightforward part.

What Higbee and firms like it are doing is systematically scanning the internet for images their clients own, identifying websites using those images without licenses, and sending demand letters at scale. The letters frequently demand thousands of dollars. Most of the time, that demand bears little relationship to what a court would actually award even if the claim is entirely valid.

The Questions Worth Asking First

Not every demand letter survives scrutiny. Before any discussion of what to pay, there are threshold questions that change the analysis entirely.

Is the photograph actually registered with the Copyright Office? Registration is required before a lawsuit can be filed. Without a timely registration, the copyright owner's remedies are limited to actual damages — typically the cost of a license — rather than the statutory damages of $750 to $150,000 per work that make these demand letters so alarming. Many of Higbee's demands involve unregistered works or works registered after infringement began.

Can they prove they represent the actual copyright owner? Higbee & Associates does not take pictures. It represents photographers. In their rush to send volume demands, these firms do not always establish a clear chain of title proving the photographer they represent actually owns the copyright in the image at issue. That is worth examining.

Do you have a defense? Some defendants run platforms where users post content — the DMCA safe harbor may apply. Others paid for a license and have documentation. Others used the image in a way that could constitute fair use, though fair use is a genuine legal analysis based on four statutory factors, not a general feeling that the use was innocent. Jonathan will tell you whether you have a real defense, not just a comfortable one.

What If the Demand Is Legitimate?

Even where the copyright is valid, the registration is in order, and the defenses are thin, the demand is frequently excessive. Jonathan has negotiated resolutions to Higbee and similar demands well below the initial ask. Knowing what courts actually award in these cases — and what these firms actually accept in settlement — changes the conversation.

Jonathan has represented clients across the full range of these disputes, from quashing subpoenas issued by serial copyright enforcers to successfully defending clients accused of online defamation and copyright infringement in federal court. If you received a demand letter from Higbee & Associates or a similar firm, a half-hour consultation will typically tell you everything you need to know about your options and what a realistic resolution looks like.