MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: DepositPhotos and Shotshop- standard purchases gives only subscription amounts?  (Read 132414 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #350 on: March 01, 2014, 09:46 »
0
That's a good idea.  If someone wants to take the time to post T&C and then HIGHLIGHT key parts of it and maybe have some form of "legalese for dummies" rewrite of those key points....all within a single portal, would be cool.  Personally I don't have the technical know how or the time, but of someone wants to do it I's heart them.


« Reply #351 on: March 01, 2014, 09:48 »
+1
Hi Ron,
Hopefully you will feel beter soon!

I take a look at your list, but although the info seem to be correct, it is also mixed up with personal opinions.
For this list is on your own website, you are free to do so of course.
But what I meant was a list with only undisputable facts. Nothing else. No scorecard. No earnings rating. Nothing personal.
It must be about more agencies then only the Top and Middle Tier and it must be corrected when info is wrong.

People easily forget, new contributors do not know and I think things that happen must be documented in a way that is not mixed up with personal feelings.

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #352 on: March 01, 2014, 09:56 »
+2
This is an excellent idea.

As a matter of fact a few days ago I was thinking that having a wall of shame regarding each agency would be a good thing, to keep track of things and warn new submitters and avoid us to forget.

« Reply #353 on: March 01, 2014, 10:01 »
+1
Today I got a personal message. It seems that what I wrote about a quality label for agencies can be misunderstood, so Ill try to explain a bit:

What I meant with quality label was a list with basic information about every specific agency and info added about problems contributors had with them.
No personal opinions, only facts.


I think its a great idea.  Over time we would get a historical build up with factual info on the agencies, that would help microstockers new and old.  Realtime factual data is information and information is everything!  As long as we can keep emotions out of it and keep to facts, it would serve all contributors and even agencies (or some of them).

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #354 on: March 01, 2014, 10:36 »
0
... have some form of "legalese for dummies" rewrite of those key points....all within a single portal, would be cool. 
The trouble is, that legalese, particularly on iStock, is written (IMO) in a deliberately obfuscatory fashion.
Several of the terms are ambiguous, and you can get different explanations from different admins or CR reps depending on who you ask.
I've seen several threads, particularly in the excusive forum, asking about the meaning of various clauses in the ASA, and there are always varying opinions of what they mean and never a definitive explanation.
Almost as soon as I joined, I asked that al the legal papers be rewritten in plain English, inasmuch as if an educated native English speaker can't definitively know what is allowed/disallowed, what about all the people for whom English isn't a first language, nor is any of the other 'community languages'.
Even knowing what the terms mean doesn't mean that an agency won't find ways of screwing you within their contract, in ways you never imagined.
Contracts can change, whereupon you've no choice between accepting or quitting, which can be a difficult decision if you have invested a large port on the site.
Some terms and conditions can change outwith the contract, so you might not know about it for a long time. E.g. iS used to have a maximum size over which a buyer could not post a file unaltered on a website, but that seems to have quietly disappeared.
And on that note, some of the agencies make it extremely difficult to find the licence conditions, even when I've deliberately been looking, so the chances of a buyer even bothering about them are pretty slim.



Uncle Pete

« Reply #355 on: March 01, 2014, 11:04 »
0
Sure a database of facts and no background or opinions would be useful for someone to see how the place operates, where it is, what it pays, and Just The Facts.

But opinions that are informational (not just hate messages from someone who left and is getting revenge) is also needed for any of us to make an intelligent and informed decision. Facts and history section. "Like lowered commissions in 2009..."

You can't have one without the other or it's rather blind to see a place that looks great, but has serious pay, distribution and internal operations issues that would scare any of us away?

Poll on the right does a fine job of showing money rank, for the people who reply. It may be questioned and have a rather large margin of error, because it's on a volunteer basis. But it's better than nothing at all.  :)

The partner program database does a good job also, people can look at see if they want in or not. There are no opinions in that, just facts and a list.

What ShadySue added is also an issue, because sometimes terms and contracts are particularly vague. Can someone resell this as a print or not? What license allows this or that. My favorite (to hate) is POD sites that show images and claim they don't have to pay for an EL Until they print and sell it. So what they get our work for free, to market and advertise, For Free, until they make a sale?

I think the facts are good, but there also needs to be some exposure of history and practices as well.

« Reply #356 on: March 01, 2014, 11:12 »
+1
Sure a database of facts and no background or opinions would be useful for someone to see how the place operates, where it is, what it pays, and Just The Facts.

But opinions that are informational (not just hate messages from someone who left and is getting revenge) is also needed for any of us to make an intelligent and informed decision. Facts and history section. "Like lowered commissions in 2009..."

You can't have one without the other or it's rather blind to see a place that looks great, but has serious pay, distribution and internal operations issues that would scare any of us away?

Poll on the right does a fine job of showing money rank, for the people who reply. It may be questioned and have a rather large margin of error, because it's on a volunteer basis. But it's better than nothing at all.  :)

The partner program database does a good job also, people can look at see if they want in or not. There are no opinions in that, just facts and a list.

What ShadySue added is also an issue, because sometimes terms and contracts are particularly vague. Can someone resell this as a print or not? What license allows this or that. My favorite (to hate) is POD sites that show images and claim they don't have to pay for an EL Until they print and sell it. So what they get our work for free, to market and advertise, For Free, until they make a sale?

I think the facts are good, but there also needs to be some exposure of history and practices as well.

You and Liz both make excellent points. I do believe something along the lines of experiential summaries, especially if there are enough data to conclude a trend, is helpful.  Something robust and PUBLIC might encourage agencies to change their shady practices (no pun on you, ShadySue) ;)

Ron

« Reply #357 on: March 01, 2014, 11:40 »
0
Hi Ron,
Hopefully you will feel beter soon!

I take a look at your list, but although the info seem to be correct, it is also mixed up with personal opinions.
For this list is on your own website, you are free to do so of course.
But what I meant was a list with only undisputable facts. Nothing else. No scorecard. No earnings rating. Nothing personal.
It must be about more agencies then only the Top and Middle Tier and it must be corrected when info is wrong.

People easily forget, new contributors do not know and I think things that happen must be documented in a way that is not mixed up with personal feelings.
Yes, I agree, the link was just an example of something similar, but not meant as quality seal.

I agree with everyone else that it needs to be factual.

I dont mind purchasing a domain. Just need a good name to build on.

Microstock Impartial Facts Figures Extracted Directly - MIFFED  ;)

But seriously, what would it be called?

Micro Stock Certification Mark - MS-CM
Micro Stock Quality Mark - MS-QM

I think we should open a thread to discuss this separately. I think Colette should do the honours as its her idea.





« Last Edit: March 01, 2014, 11:50 by Ron »

« Reply #358 on: March 01, 2014, 12:02 »
+2
I didnt expect so much reactions on what came up in my mind when thinking about the unrighteous way contributors are treatened by DP. Now it feels we are deducting from the original subject of the topic.

The reason I made the decision to deactivate my images with Istock last year was the way some contributors were treatened. For me that was unacceptable. Spread over the world as contributors we have no power. The only power we have is to make the principal choice not to stand with unrighteousness. But that is a personal choice and everyone must decide for him/herself what to accept or not.
But when we stay and accept everything only to have some money,  things will only get worser and worser.

I wrote that I choose to be not with DP for what I read about them, but when I should have a portfolio with them, I should leave very soon when they dont change their behaviour quickly.
Thinking again, I suppose that I should leave nonetheless. Why should I trust someone who has delivered proof that he can not be trusted?

That they say to keep the original images for statistical reasons, when someone wants to leave them made me very angry. It gives me the feeling that contributors are catched in a trap.

« Reply #359 on: March 01, 2014, 12:49 »
+1
Ron, I am not interested in being honoured in any way. It was a simple thinking coming up and I don't even know if it can be realised. I only think that there is a need for this knowledge.
Let's keep it simple: When Leaf has no problems with it and tells us what is not allowed on such a list, we can start a separate topic and gather the information we need. The list will grow over time with new agencies. From a lot of agencies I know nothing at all, but perhaps others do.
Stay with facts. What Shady Sue writes may be true, but we need to be careful to not write unproven accusations.

And there are other things contributors needs to know.
For example: There was a question  about The 3d Studio and tax witholding on this forum. The saying was: they withhold 30 percent tax for every non US contributor. I have searched their website and it seems no problem for contributors from countries that has a tax treaty with the US. It is just the same as with other agencies: Simply fill in the appropriate form. But I can't find a clear answer. Or possibly they have recently change it. When someone wants to join them and he is from outside the US, he needs to know  before if this is true or not. This kind of things can easy be found and cleared up too this way.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #360 on: March 01, 2014, 13:07 »
+2
From what I said, I think the key is "Even knowing what the terms mean doesn't mean that an agency won't find ways of screwing you within their contract, in ways you never imagined."

Did anyone think iS would potentially go into the Getty/Google deal?
Did anyone imagine DP would do the Shotshop deal, and be happy to say that you get a sub sale but they can sell for whatever they like?

The objective facts should be checked out by anyone signing up with an agency.
It's what's between the lines that can catch everyone out.
(other than the people who sign up, submit images, then are suprised when certain things happen that are clearly spelled out).

« Reply #361 on: March 01, 2014, 13:29 »
+3
I don't know how many of you use TripAdvisor, but it seems like we want a type of TripAdvisor site for stock agencies (and possibly other businesses too). That isn't as easy as one might like - fighting off fake entries for example - but it's a great way for people to see what hotels/restaurants stock agencies/services are like.

You can sort things by date so that old/bad behavior can be over time ameliorated by improvements, but history is never erased (unlike the BBB and Angie's List)

« Reply #362 on: March 01, 2014, 13:30 »
0
A well-made, objective list like that would indeed be a worthy project to contribute to.

« Reply #363 on: March 01, 2014, 13:35 »
0
Shady Sue: Yes, you are right, but you can't protect yourself from what you do not know and from what tomorrow brings.
Nothing is certain in life.

When someone decide to join Istock today: It is his own choice. No problem.
But let him don't come and complain about the way he is treatened when another finding from Istock comes up.
For he knew before what to expect!
You (and others onboard) have the right to complain. You couldn't imagine that Istock should go this low.

And, as far as we know until now, still today there are agencies that don't do such things. Even from the 'former Istock' nobody expected such behaviour.

Ron

« Reply #364 on: March 01, 2014, 14:02 »
0
Ron, I am not interested in being honoured in any way. It was a simple thinking coming up and I don't even know if it can be realised.
I think I am being misunderstood. I meant do the honors of opening a separate thread about this. :)

Someone else can start the thread, Leaf can move this part of the topic to the new thread. No problem.

« Reply #365 on: March 01, 2014, 14:23 »
+3
I don't know how many of you use TripAdvisor, but it seems like we want a type of TripAdvisor site for stock agencies (and possibly other businesses too). That isn't as easy as one might like - fighting off fake entries for example - but it's a great way for people to see what hotels/restaurants stock agencies/services are like.

You can sort things by date so that old/bad behavior can be over time ameliorated by improvements, but history is never erased (unlike the BBB and Angie's List)
Nope. Something similar to a wiki would be a better idea, I think. With obligatory moderation from someone before any edits.

Also, we can get in touch with agencies who treat contributors fairly and "certify them". I know there has been talk about this before, and it's probably a good idea.

« Reply #366 on: March 01, 2014, 14:47 »
+1
Deleting you from the Partner program is a difficult technical process. Thus, unfortunately, it cant be achieved momentarily. Our technical department is already working on it. We are planning to complete the process by March 8th.


Amazing.    It's a Roach Motel - you check in, but you can't check out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roach_Motel_(insect_trap)

Ron

« Reply #367 on: March 01, 2014, 15:22 »
0
I don't know how many of you use TripAdvisor, but it seems like we want a type of TripAdvisor site for stock agencies (and possibly other businesses too). That isn't as easy as one might like - fighting off fake entries for example - but it's a great way for people to see what hotels/restaurants stock agencies/services are like.

You can sort things by date so that old/bad behavior can be over time ameliorated by improvements, but history is never erased (unlike the BBB and Angie's List)
Nope. Something similar to a wiki would be a better idea, I think. With obligatory moderation from someone before any edits.

Also, we can get in touch with agencies who treat contributors fairly and "certify them". I know there has been talk about this before, and it's probably a good idea.
I like that

« Reply #368 on: March 01, 2014, 19:33 »
0
I don't know how many of you use TripAdvisor, but it seems like we want a type of TripAdvisor site for stock agencies (and possibly other businesses too). That isn't as easy as one might like - fighting off fake entries for example - but it's a great way for people to see what hotels/restaurants stock agencies/services are like.

You can sort things by date so that old/bad behavior can be over time ameliorated by improvements, but history is never erased (unlike the BBB and Angie's List)
Nope. Something similar to a wiki would be a better idea, I think. With obligatory moderation from someone before any edits.

Also, we can get in touch with agencies who treat contributors fairly and "certify them". I know there has been talk about this before, and it's probably a good idea.
I like that

Didn't we even have a mockup of a seal the agency could put on their site at one time?

« Reply #369 on: March 01, 2014, 19:34 »
0
Drats... $1.50 short of payout so I guess I can't quit for another month.

farbled

« Reply #370 on: March 01, 2014, 21:43 »
0
Drats... $1.50 short of payout so I guess I can't quit for another month.

2.70 for me, but I only have one photo left up.

« Reply #371 on: March 01, 2014, 22:14 »
0
Trip adviser thing, cool!

After reading this tread a bit ago I too contacted DP by live chat....

she informed me that "shotshop" was a "partner site" ??? And told me that I could email support with a heading in the subject "shotshop" and they would remove me...

I have not seen any of my images on that site but wanted to make sure I was not and will not appear on any :)

Lack of transparency and a need NOT to have a middle agency taking yet another cut in my small earnings is why I always "opt out"


My Very Best :)
KimsCreativeHub.com

« Reply #372 on: March 02, 2014, 22:48 »
0
I don't know how many of you use TripAdvisor, but it seems like we want a type of TripAdvisor site for stock agencies (and possibly other businesses too). That isn't as easy as one might like - fighting off fake entries for example - but it's a great way for people to see what hotels/restaurants stock agencies/services are like.

You can sort things by date so that old/bad behavior can be over time ameliorated by improvements, but history is never erased (unlike the BBB and Angie's List)

I regularly use TripAdvisor and find it an excellent source of information for travel planning. And this is a brilliant idea particularly as it could serve the public at large, contributors and buyers alike.

Consumers or buyers are frequently as concerned about the ethical standards of a business, as much as we as contributors are, when we find ourselves exposed to malicious or unfair trade practices.

A public forum can therefore help to keep the whole supply chain 'cleaner' by forcing everyone to be more actively concerned about their total business image.

« Reply #373 on: March 03, 2014, 04:11 »
+4
Hi all,
i think its a great idea to make the Agencies transparent. We can create an information networks linking for Contributors to inform artists quickly about API joint ventures like this DP-Shotshop deal.
- Twitter
- Facebook
etc.
Strengthening of competition among the agencies for better Contributor conditions:
- make the Agencys transparent and ready to benchmark.
- creating a Contributor Award for good Agencies

Maybe there is a start:

microstock-transparency.wikia.com

Wikia is a great place to work together and using our swarm intelligence. Everyone can help to fight back  >:(.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 04:40 by R2D2 »

« Reply #374 on: March 03, 2014, 08:56 »
+1
I don't know how many of you use TripAdvisor, but it seems like we want a type of TripAdvisor site for stock agencies (and possibly other businesses too). That isn't as easy as one might like - fighting off fake entries for example - but it's a great way for people to see what hotels/restaurants stock agencies/services are like.

You can sort things by date so that old/bad behavior can be over time ameliorated by improvements, but history is never erased (unlike the BBB and Angie's List)

I regularly use TripAdvisor and find it an excellent source of information for travel planning. And this is a brilliant idea particularly as it could serve the public at large, contributors and buyers alike.

Consumers or buyers are frequently as concerned about the ethical standards of a business, as much as we as contributors are, when we find ourselves exposed to malicious or unfair trade practices.

A public forum can therefore help to keep the whole supply chain 'cleaner' by forcing everyone to be more actively concerned about their total business image.

I also use Trip Advisor.  In fact I actually signed up to become a member because that way I am allowed to contact "individuals" who post.  I do this especially when I am traveling to new, third world locations.  If they post negative or positive feedback you can contact them directly to get further clarification.  The real questions is....

1. Would anyone (buyers or contributors) use it as decision making criteria?
2. Would the agencies consider the postings (feedback, experience, etc) vital enough to listen and react?

I would also think that there should be a buyer section where they can post their experiences around service levels, pricing, etc.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
5513 Views
Last post January 12, 2013, 16:06
by cardmaverick
0 Replies
5233 Views
Last post March 28, 2013, 13:35
by tomac
41 Replies
21531 Views
Last post April 08, 2015, 14:54
by Noedelhap
12 Replies
7196 Views
Last post March 17, 2016, 12:17
by Noedelhap
5 Replies
5192 Views
Last post January 30, 2016, 13:39
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors