Today the WSJ/Vauhini Vara in the article "Photo Agencies Scour the Web For Copyright Violations":
PicScout said it charges corporate clients like Getty and Jacksonville, Fla.-based SuperStock Inc. a base fee plus a percentage of the revenue they regain when they bill those who are using the images. PicScout declined to reveal further details of its corporate fees. It also offers a subscription service for individual photographers, starting at $14.95 a month to monitor 500 images.
Digimarc Corp. of Beaverton, Ore., plants a "digital watermark" on images for E. L. Woody, a celebrity photographer in Hollywood, Calif., as well as for Corbis. Photos stamped with the watermark look normal unless they are viewed using software that can be downloaded for free from Digimarc's Web site. Like PicScout, Digimarc uses an automated process to scour the Web for its watermarked photos. Digimarc sends regular reports to clients detailing where it has found their images. The company declined to say how much it charges for its services. [...]
In the first four months of this year, Corbis recovered nearly $1 million by filing lawsuits or sending letters demanding payment, but made "much more" by getting offenders to voluntarily become customers, Mr. Weiskopf said. (He declined to be more specific.) [...]
Getty, for its part, has not filed a lawsuit against a photo thief in at least four years. [...] Sometimes Getty sends warning letters to sites demanding that photos be removed. [...]
Ms. Trevino [spokeswoman Getty Images] said that the company typically does not offer editorial subscriptions to blogs, but that it is reevaluating that policy and might do so in the future. "On the one hand, you can't discount blogs. It's how people like to get information," she said. "On the other hand, are they all legitimate news-gathering organizations? No."