If you received a “Notice of Copyright Infringement” from Zlatkin Cann Entertainment on behalf of photographer David Oppenheimer, don’t ignore it or pay it on reflex. Oppenheimer is one of the most active copyright plaintiffs in the country, and his claims now arrive through a Chicago law firm we had not seen on his behalf before. The letter will give you a short window to respond. How you use that window will shape what the claim costs you.
We have handled hundreds of copyright demand letters and have dealt with Oppenheimer’s claims before. Below is what you need to know about who is behind the letter, what to do in the first week, and where the leverage usually sits.
Who Is David Oppenheimer?
David Oppenheimer is a professional photographer who licenses his images and sells prints. He is better known among business owners for enforcement. He has filed hundreds of copyright lawsuits in federal courts across the United States, and he has brought claims before the Copyright Claims Board.
Courts have taken notice. In Oppenheimer v. Scarafile (D.S.C. 2022), the court said the evidence showed he could be considered an excessive filer of copyright infringement suits. The defendants there argued that he earned far more from litigation settlements than from licensing and print sales. The court left it to a jury to decide whether his conduct supported a copyright misuse defense. The case settled first.
Oppenheimer has used several law firms over the years, including SRIPLAW. We covered his tactics in an earlier post, What To Do With A Dreadful David Oppenheimer Copyright Demand.
What Is New: Zlatkin Cann Entertainment
Oppenheimer notices are now going out from Zlatkin Cann Entertainment, a Chicago firm whose managing partner is Ilya G. Zlatkin. The notices we have seen arrive by email with a PDF letter attached and a firm response date roughly two weeks out.
A few features are worth noting:
- No dollar figure. The letter may not state a settlement amount. That is not generosity. It invites you to negotiate against yourself or to call and reveal facts before you know your exposure.
- A short deadline. The response date is a negotiating tool, not a court deadline. Missing it can still prompt a lawsuit, so treat it seriously.
- Multiple addresses. The notice may go to every email address connected to you or your business, including personal and school accounts.
A new firm does not change the underlying law. It does mean the letter will look unfamiliar, and an unfamiliar letter is easier to mishandle.
What To Do in the First Week
- Do not call or email the firm yourself. Anything you say about where the image came from or how long it ran can be used to set the demand.
- Preserve the evidence, then take the image down. Screenshot the page with its URL and date, note when the image first went up, and save any record of where it came from (a stock site, a web designer, a vendor). Then remove it.
- Identify who posted it. If a contractor, web developer, or property listing service placed the image, your agreements with them may shift responsibility.
- Find the insurance policy. Some general liability and media policies cover advertising injury claims, including copyright. Tell your carrier early.
- Calendar the response date. Get counsel involved well before it, not the day of.
Where the Leverage Usually Sits
Every claim turns on its facts, but these questions decide most Oppenheimer demands:
- When was the photo registered? Under 17 U.S.C. § 412, statutory damages and attorney’s fees are generally unavailable if the infringement began before registration, unless the work was registered within three months of first publication. Without them, the claim is often worth little more than a reasonable license fee.
- What would a license have cost? Actual damages are usually measured by the fee the photographer would have charged. Evidence of his real licensing history matters.
- Is there a removed watermark or credit claim? Demands sometimes add a claim under 17 U.S.C. § 1202 for removing copyright management information. That claim requires proof of knowledge and intent, which is frequently missing.
- Is the claim timely? Copyright claims must be brought within three years under 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). Courts apply a discovery rule, and after Warner Chappell v. Nealy the timing analysis deserves a careful look.
- Does misuse apply? As Scarafile shows, a litigation-driven enforcement pattern can support a copyright misuse defense in the right case.
The answers set the real value of the claim. That number is usually far below what an opening demand implies.
How Heitner Legal Can Help
Heitner Legal handles copyright demand letters nationwide, usually on a flat fee before any lawsuit is filed. We review the registration record, the licensing history, and your facts. Then we respond in writing and negotiate toward a resolution that reflects what the claim is actually worth, with a full written release.
If you received a Zlatkin Cann Entertainment letter for David Oppenheimer, or any other copyright demand, contact us before the response date. Communications are kept confidential and answered quickly.
This post is general information, not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.