The feed from Yahoo might have permission for their use, but you MAY not have (an absolute) permission from Yahoo to "retweet" the images, particularly since they are loaded from the original copyrighted site Yahoo is sharing.

This, of course, is NOT legal advice, just common sense.

Also not legal advice, but if Yahoo is placing it within their feed they are technically syndicating it. A good starting point would be Yahoo's TOS regarding their feeds. Can they be used on a website or are they solely for use in Feed readers and RSS clients?

Mack.

Only a lawyer working on your behalf can advise you. I don't answer emails like that because I'm not a lawyer.

[blog.engagedlegal.com...]

Read the licence on reusing the Yahoo RSS feed. Most feeds are for individual public consumption, and not for repurposing, unless it says it can be re-used. I'm sure AP has paid a licence for the images, which means they would have agreed to use it on "their" RSS, and, perhaps (we don't know) we are assuming Yahoo has paid a licence fee for the use.

I use a feed (not Yahoo) and it specifically allows re-use on other websites, but it doesn't have images, just text.

This is the only thing I can find regarding a TOS for Yahoo's RSS:

Section 2, subsection o
RSS Feeds. If you use an RSS feed provided by us (each, a “Yahoo RSS Feed”), you are only permitted to display the content that is provided in the feed, without modification, and you must provide attribution to our source website and link to the full article on Yahoo RSS Feed content. You may not incorporate advertising into any Yahoo RSS Feed. We reserve the right to discontinue any Yahoo RSS Feed at any time and to require anyone to cease use of a Yahoo RSS Feed at any time for any reason. Each of our products or services may also have more specific terms of use for related Yahoo RSS Feeds.

[legal.yahoo.com...]

I read through and don't see anything about not being allowed to use the RSS feed on a website, as long as you don't modify it and give due credit. Which I do.

I'm not hiring an attorney, I don't have that kind of money these days. Which I guess is their whole point... scare people into just sending them a check and making it go away. Jokes on them, I don't have $350 to throw away, either! LOL There's an old saying in these here parts: you can't get blood out of a turnip. That's me; I'm the turnip :-/

Blood, turnip, that's true. What else is also true is a complaint of infringement to your host and that can lead to a shut down. If you are hosting yourself, that can lead to direct action from local authorities or search engines.

Pick and choose, choose and pick. Or treat it as a "cease and desist" and get back to work.

Not A Lawyer ... but copyright is pretty serious these days.

csdude, they don't want you to pay the $350, they'd love you to start emailing them and being flippant, This is a 3rd party service company that gets paid by delivering results.

If you haven't already, add noindex to all images on your site via htaccess and go to Search console to remove all your images from search with a removal request. It's how they found you, most likely. If they move your case to their legal team, they'll go find other images you hosted without permission.

Clear your Google and Wayback Machine cache, too. While a bit shady, these people have the law on their side and have a well oiled machine in place. I'd even delete all images you are hosting that came from any RSS feed. I'm not saying stop what you're doing, I'm saying don't keep images online indefinitely unless you took them, don't make their job easy.

FWIW, I don't cache any of the images on my end, I load them directly from the Yahoo RSS source. I modified the script on my end so that if the <source> is "Associated Press" then it's skipped, and that's really all that I CAN do. Like @tangor said, I treat it like a cease-and-desist and go on about my day.

I've had to fight in court countless times against slimy attorneys. Been there, done that! LOL I know my rights, and I have no fear of a shyster or a judge. If the judge thinks that I've done something wrong then I'll face the consequences like a man, but to the best of my knowledge I have not so I will be happy to defend myself. It's ridiculous (impossible, even) to expect me to research every outlet that Yahoo decides to aggregate, this responsibility would have to lie at Yahoo's feet. And I'm confident that any respectable judge would easily see that.

they'd love you to start emailing them and being flippant

Very true, @Sgt_Kickaxe, and I'm definitely not being flippant! I've been around long enough to assume that anything I say to them can and will be used against me. My one and only email to them includes no emotion at all, I simply stated the facts and closed. I'm not angry and I'm not scared... when dealing with shysters like this, when in doubt ask yourself, "what would Spock do?" Better yet, "what would before-the-emotion-chip Data do?"

FWIW, I don't cache any of the images on my end, I load them directly from the Yahoo RSS source.

If the image was never hosted on your site, that will change the legalities a bit. How would they be sure you hosted their image at all? You would be subject to the terms of the feed, not to them, as their beef would be with Yahoo.

There is a lot of case law on sharing feeds, hosting images you do not own the copyright to, etc. Google's entire image search setup hosts images they don't own and they distribute them to all...

Thing is, in a lawsuit, you lose even if you win. It's best to avoid them. Before you pay any fee you can ask for proof you did as they claim. It's not an unreasonable request since you didn't do it manually.

You can also talk to someone at Yahoo and see what they say.

Good luck.