Other Contributors

About Us

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Consumer Law Professors Who Want to Read or Sign On to a Comment on the CFPB's Proposed Debt Collection Rule . . . | Main | CFPB Abandons Defense of Its Own Constitutionality »

Monday, September 16, 2019


James L. Haugen


In light of your bolded sentence, this is my actual response to one of Higbee's Senior Claims Resolution Specialist:

Your silence speaks volumes with your failure to discuss an itemized accounting of (1) “the normal licensing fee,” (2) “the costs incurred in detecting and pursuing the unauthorized use,” and (3) “the nature of its use” mentioned in the Demand Letter. In light of your silence, I’ll begin the discussion of the itemized accounting. The photo in question presents a [field of] daffodils. While the photo certainly uses nature, the nature of its use on a church’s website isn’t one for making income or profit. So, in my opinion, an amount attributable to “the nature of its use” is no discernable amount (i.e., $0.00).

With respect to “the costs incurred in detecting and pursuing your alleged unauthorized use,” this appears to be minimal. I’ll assume that the information technology employed in this matter is a sunk cost and no additional expense was incurred. Although Higbee has probably entered into an agreement with AFP that is based upon a contingency fee, I will assume for the sake of discussion that the agreement is based upon a fixed fee and the amount of billable hours. Mr. Higbee’s cost is not likely to be more than $5.00; here, I’m assuming that his billable rate is $300/hour and no more than one minute was spent reviewing and signing the boilerplate Demand Letter (although the signature could just be a rubber stamp). Then, there’s your cost which is not likely to be more than $5.00; here, I’m working under the assumption that your hourly rate of pay is $20.00/hour and no more than fifteen minutes of your time has been taken in this matter. Then, there’s a cost for paper and postage which I’ll assume is probably no more than $5.00. As shown by my calculations and the assumptions upon which they are based, “the costs incurred in detecting and pursuing the unauthorized use” is no more than $15.00.

When you subtract these costs from your client’s asking price of $3,390, you would be stating that the “normal licensing fee” is $3,375. Of course, if my assumptions are incorrect, please educate me with an itemized accounting as I originally requested. Until then, my church will take a pass upon paying a licensing fee of $3,375.

Keep up the great work, Paul!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

June 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30