MicrostockGroup

Searching an image for a client, I just noticed something I find peculiar.

Corbis images are marketing images sent by the photographer they represent on OTHER websites... such as Fotolia?
http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/royalty-free/42-18083490/nurse-listening-to-patients-heartbeat]
[url]http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/royalty-free/42-18083490/nurse-listening-to-patients-heartbeat[/url]

Username Corbis:
http://www.fotolia.com/id/12864433
http://www.visualphotos.com/image/2x3380056/nurse_listening_to_patients_heartbeat

Maybe nothing out of the ordinary, but to me I found it funny to see a Stock company selling off image to other ''competitor's'' Microstock busines... unless Corbis owns Fotolia and I do not know it?

Yes interesting says Corbis 26,381 results on FT.

Hell are we bad to offer such evil products

I was just wondering... Corbis has an account on Fotolia... He sells an image for a crappy price. ''Corbis'' user gets the money. What do the Photographer get? 50% of 15% ? .... Or nothing at all, Corbis just throw it in their pockets...

Would be curious about that

There are many agencies and sub-agencies that sell via the Infinite-coll. at FT but most of them not under their real name.

UNSOLICITED OPINIONS BEYOND THIS TOPIC:  I fear that eventually most images anywhere on the internet will be available FREE to anybody with internet access. The copyright laws now are practically worthless -- violated by millions of folks knowingly or unknowingly. This is to say nothing of sales by related microstock site "partners" that never get credited to the photographer. Put me in the pessimist column, but human nature being what it is, I believe that theft is just as prevalent in microstock as in any other business.

Eventually, in my crystal ball, there will be free images across enough sites to put most stock image sites, as currently organized, out of business. I see sites providing, at most, only a thin share of ad popup earnings to contributors. I would imagine that eventually most social networking sites will demand that all images posted will carry with it release permissions for those sites to market those images themselves with no compensation. It doesn't seem much of a leap in logic to believe that soon software will be able to automatically cull good images from millions images and auto keyword them.

For RM (and I have only RM so far with them) you get 37.5% (with the new contract before it was 40%) and they don't sell their RM-stuff through other agencies. I had last month a sale with them that netted me 1600,- Euros (my share) so yes it's worth with them.

you are right but you can easily test, I have RF-Images from a comparable agency at Infinite, I simply bought two of my own Images at FT (smallest size 10€ each). It was reported correctly in my statement (same amount of a few cents each) therefore I know that FT  pays 25% to their partner-agencies. It's a depressing way to reduce photographers commissions even more.

Race, I'm afraid that genie has been free of the bottle for some time. The moment that digital images were downloadable from the internet was the beginning of the end of copyright protections. It's a matter of overwhelming numbers. With the billions of images available in ever-larger file sizes all that's standing in the way of universally free (and quite useable) images is a sophisticated search engine. Oh, wait, I believe Google image search will do that quite nicely.

Regarding my earlier comment, I just came across this image, one of a series of mine (they're all on there) on Corbis.  It's a Getty image:
http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/royalty-free/42-27326806/couple-fooling-around-in-a-christmas-tree
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/couple-fooling-around-in-a-christmas-tree-lot-with-royalty-free-image/81356862

Holy !@$% ... This is starting to look more and more like an agency Orgy... and contributors are not invited.

I can understand why they do it ($$$$), but I don't find the copyright part very honest of them. I does give your images more views, but are you really getting paid what you should... not mentioning that they keep the credits for themselves...!