MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Biggest Rip Off in microstock history! Shocking finds..  (Read 28904 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #175 on: March 17, 2013, 19:41 »
+1
I think that there may be a way to make the main functionality free and have some premium/add-on features or products for sale.

Thanks for thinking of my pockets!   :P :D


« Reply #176 on: March 18, 2013, 04:56 »
+3
I think one problem with having a central system or person sending an official take down notices is that they have to be sent by the copyright owner themselves.  I once notified fotolia of an infringing account and they told me to notify the original artist so that he could send the copyright infringement himself.  It didn't help that I pointed out the problem to them.

Perhaps a reasonable alternative would be to simply have a page with appropriate links to contact the various agencies (where to send the takedown notice) and other usefull links so that if someone found their images stolen they could take the necessary steps to get the images taken down without doing a full days research of what they need to do.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #177 on: March 18, 2013, 14:55 »
0
I think one problem with having a central system or person sending an official take down notices is that they have to be sent by the copyright owner themselves.  I once notified fotolia of an infringing account and they told me to notify the original artist so that he could send the copyright infringement himself.  It didn't help that I pointed out the problem to them.

Perhaps a reasonable alternative would be to simply have a page with appropriate links to contact the various agencies (where to send the takedown notice) and other usefull links so that if someone found their images stolen they could take the necessary steps to get the images taken down without doing a full days research of what they need to do.

Yes, perhaps it can be done as a sticky topic? An informative post about each agency and what to do, or who to contact if you find one or more of your images being stolen?

« Reply #178 on: March 18, 2013, 16:09 »
0
Ok next problem....next idea modification...

What about setting a system where people can willingly transfer copyrights to that service only in that purpose of defending their work, so one service or a person running it could legally represent all of us who joined and get signature to speak in the name of any outor that joined...

Those collections are huge sometimes , if only people from the forum joined im sure someones work would be there....what are the opposite chances ?  Whenever someone opened topic like that i find something mine there...and u ?

Its sure beats this nothing we have now.


Maybe someone wit more knowledge in that legal direction can think a way to make it work.

« Last Edit: March 18, 2013, 16:15 by Lizard »

EmberMike

« Reply #179 on: March 19, 2013, 09:04 »
+2
vectorstock is a disgrace to microstock community

What drives me crazy about vectorstock is that they could be a good company. More amazingly, they could be making a heck of a lot more money for themselves, but they are their own worst enemy. Their logic is that lower prices encourage higher sales volume. And in some ways they're right, but they're aiming so low that they undercut the competition and themselves at the same time. They want to price everything at $1 to beat the competition. I don't work with any other company that sells a vector for less than $6. VS could have set their prices at $5, still undercutting the competition, paid out 40% to everyone, and that would have been a deal that most people would get on board with and they would make a lot of money.

They say that higher prices will generate less sales. I don't even think that's true, especially when we're talking about going from $1 up to $3 or $5 and still remaining below the prices of most competitors. I've got a 3-credit image there that has sold 410 times, but according to VS, pricing my work at 3 credits is supposed to hurt sales.

I've got stuff on vectorstock, although lately I feel like I'm done with them and I won't upload anything new. I've never given them all of my work, at least not the best stuff, and I've demanded that most of my work gets at least 3-credit pricing. They agreed to that, but they don't always honor the request. They said they would, but haven't.

I hate to see a company squander an opportunity to do something good. Vectorstock is doing exactly that. They have potential, but they'll never realize their full potential because they are stuck in the belief that selling $1 images is they only way they can make a buck. They have a good amount of buyers. I guess they're just afraid they'll scare off those buyers if they raise prices, even though that belief is false. I wish they'd just look at their own data and see that people are willing to pay more.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 09:10 by EmberMike »

Microbius

« Reply #180 on: March 19, 2013, 09:14 »
+2
I think you may be giving them more credit than they deserve, have you seen the ads they use and where they appear?
It is a silhouette of a naked woman and I have only ever seen it on sites giving away stolen vectors.

It seems to me they are targeting people that are frequenting warez sites and don't want to pay for anything. Vectorstock figure that a few cents is better for us than the alternative (nothing)
The problem is people downloading illegal stuff may be prepare to pay a dollar for a vector if it isn't on the free site (yet), they will also have no qualms about posting it on their favorite warez site when they are done.

Also as I have already mentioned, they have never to my knowledge shut a portfolio down for violating copyright, all the major infringers reported here over the last few years still have large active portfolios on the site. I just rechecked one from a serial thief, and yep it's still there, with at least one new trace from a famous stock photo.

EmberMike

« Reply #181 on: March 19, 2013, 09:23 »
+2
I think you may be giving them more credit than they deserve, have you seen the ads they use and where they appear?
It is a silhouette of a naked woman and I have only ever seen it on sites giving away stolen vectors.

It seems to me they are targeting people that are frequenting warez sites and don't want to pay for anything...

And yet those same people are paying more than $1 very often. Many have no problem paying $3 or $5.

To be fair, I've seen plenty of ads for other companies that we all support on those same warez sites. All of the companies do the same thing, they are just buying ad insertions on any site that is remotely vector-related. I've seen as many BigStock ads on those sites as vectorstock ads.

I'm not saying that it's right, it's just what's happening. If we're going to say that we should avoid any site that will buy ads on warez site, then there are a lot more names on the right side of ths page we should be crossing off the list.

Microbius

« Reply #182 on: March 19, 2013, 09:29 »
+2
True, I've been +1ing you because I agree with most of what you're saying, I just have less faith in them than you based on the same evidence. Just a difference of opinion. I feel like the fact that they said they would price your work higher, then didn't, speaks volumes about their integrity.

« Reply #183 on: March 19, 2013, 10:23 »
0
I dont think vector stock is a legitimate site. Probably an offshoot site from the same hackerz that illegally download these images w stolen credit cards. They probably amassed so much free illegal downloads in the beginning and decided to sell these things themselves. Its like laundering dirty goods. Who wouldn't want to profit off free electronic data if your a crook? anyone do a whois on this company?

Its clear that this company doesn't care about how it makes its dollar because they have no respect for the artist for valuing the work for $1. I would be cautious in giving any financial information to these crooks. EVERYONE SHOULD BOYCOTT THIS SITE!!! It is just hurting the vector stock industry!
Your shooting yourselves in the foot by having your work on this site.

« Reply #184 on: March 19, 2013, 10:37 »
0
Hmmm. just checked on the site. So they claim they are from new zealand. I wonder how strict the copyright laws are there.

This site has a section on virus notice? Come on, your giving yourself away now that you guys are hackers. Which other agency has any text on viruses? At the very least there is no inspection process and you can upload all illegally download warez you got to this site.... The sites that contain viruses are usually the seedy sites that has illegally obtained material being given out for free.

Think about it people, these guys are crooks.

http://www.vectorstock.com/faq]
[url]http://www.vectorstock.com/faq
[/url]

EmberMike

« Reply #185 on: March 19, 2013, 11:38 »
0
I dont think vector stock is a legitimate site. Probably an offshoot site from the same hackerz that illegally download these images w stolen credit cards. They probably amassed so much free illegal downloads in the beginning and decided to sell these things themselves. Its like laundering dirty goods. Who wouldn't want to profit off free electronic data if your a crook? ...

Any proof of that? I've never heard of a case where they've been suggested to be populating the site with stolen content that they acquired.

...This site has a section on virus notice? Come on, your giving yourself away now that you guys are hackers..

Having a virus warning on a stock site is a bit odd, since stock assets can't carry viruses, at least not vectors and JPGs. But does that mean that they are "hackers"? Kind of a stretch...

Look, I'm not defending their business model, their pricing, etc. But let's keep the conversation in reality. We have no proof or reason to suspect that this company is anything less than legitimate. I'd consider the virus warning just some overprotective legal speak that is strange and unnecessary, but harmless.

« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 11:42 by EmberMike »

« Reply #186 on: March 19, 2013, 11:45 »
+3
Its clear that this company doesn't care about how it makes its dollar because they have no respect for the artist for valuing the work for $1. I would be cautious in giving any financial information to these crooks. EVERYONE SHOULD BOYCOTT THIS SITE!!! It is just hurting the vector stock industry!
Your shooting yourselves in the foot by having your work on this site.

Is selling subscriptions that much different? I don't see how one is an absolute abomination and the other is just how you earn a buck. Both are based on the concept of getting enough volume to make it profitable. Looking at VS's credits, you have to buy at least $25 worth of credits to make a purchase.

I'm not defending Vectorstock. I just don't really see a drastic difference between it and a subscription model. Both severely undercut the market.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 11:49 by cthoman »

« Reply #187 on: March 19, 2013, 13:39 »
0
Its clear that this company doesn't care about how it makes its dollar because they have no respect for the artist for valuing the work for $1. I would be cautious in giving any financial information to these crooks. EVERYONE SHOULD BOYCOTT THIS SITE!!! It is just hurting the vector stock industry!
Your shooting yourselves in the foot by having your work on this site.

Is selling subscriptions that much different? I don't see how one is an absolute abomination and the other is just how you earn a buck. Both are based on the concept of getting enough volume to make it profitable. Looking at VS's credits, you have to buy at least $25 worth of credits to make a purchase.

I'm not defending Vectorstock. I just don't really see a drastic difference between it and a subscription model. Both severely undercut the market.

The difference between subscription and vectorstocks pricing scheme is that the buyer is paying a lot more than a dollar when he buys a subscription plan starting at $249 a month. The lowest you need to spend on SS is $19 for one single image.

To the buyer, $25 for 25 images is a great deal. Vectorstock is getting the buyer used to thinking he can get decent images for a buck. That buyer mentality hurts us all in the long run and i'm doing my best to slow that tide.

I have been against subscription prices but the reality is that i am independent now and I would be foolish not to put my images on SS. I have been looking at SS images for the past 5 years and the quality has been getting better and better every year. I think this is another reasons buyers are flocking to SS. They have just as good quality images as istock.

One of my images i uploaded last month on SS got me 39 dls so far. thats $9.75. i cry and laugh at the same time since i was making over $10 a dl for that vector image on istock at 35% royalty.

I am pretty sure istock will continue to lose buyers so that is why i decided to go independent late last year.

« Reply #188 on: March 19, 2013, 13:51 »
0
I dont think vector stock is a legitimate site. Probably an offshoot site from the same hackerz that illegally download these images w stolen credit cards. They probably amassed so much free illegal downloads in the beginning and decided to sell these things themselves. Its like laundering dirty goods. Who wouldn't want to profit off free electronic data if your a crook? ...

Any proof of that? I've never heard of a case where they've been suggested to be populating the site with stolen content that they acquired.

...This site has a section on virus notice? Come on, your giving yourself away now that you guys are hackers..

Having a virus warning on a stock site is a bit odd, since stock assets can't carry viruses, at least not vectors and JPGs. But does that mean that they are "hackers"? Kind of a stretch...

Look, I'm not defending their business model, their pricing, etc. But let's keep the conversation in reality. We have no proof or reason to suspect that this company is anything less than legitimate. I'd consider the virus warning just some overprotective legal speak that is strange and unnecessary, but harmless.

Its just my thoughts. I have no proof but just because its a web site doesn't make them a legit company. I don't think my ideas are far fetched when we live in a world with scammers and scam artist everywhere looking to make a buck. Do we need proof for it to be a reality?

My comment for them to be hackers might be far off from the truth but it is entirely possible and in my eyes probable.

EmberMike

« Reply #189 on: March 19, 2013, 14:23 »
0
Its just my thoughts. I have no proof but just because its a web site doesn't make them a legit company. I don't think my ideas are far fetched when we live in a world with scammers and scam artist everywhere looking to make a buck. Do we need proof for it to be a reality?

My comment for them to be hackers might be far off from the truth but it is entirely possible and in my eyes probable.

I don't understand. Is it just the pricing? You said it yourself, you have no proof that the company is anything less than legit, it's just a theory of yours. So barring any proof of that coming out and putting that idea aside, it seems like it just boils down to price.

And that's fine, lots of people have issues with their pricing. But why jump into false accusations and conspiracy theories? Why not just say you don't like their pricing and think they're bad for business?


« Reply #190 on: March 19, 2013, 14:34 »
0

The difference between subscription and vectorstocks pricing scheme is that the buyer is paying a lot more than a dollar when he buys a subscription plan starting at $249 a month. The lowest you need to spend on SS is $19 for one single image.

That doesn't necessarily translate to money in my pocket. They could buy just a single file of mine with that subscription. I agree though that it's definitely hard to match the volume of SS, but I'd say Vectorstock outsold DT, FT and other subscriptions. So, it's hard for me to say it is much different.

That said, it's definitely the wrong direction to go, but they seem like a pretty small time player in the grand scheme of market cannibalism.

Pinocchio

« Reply #191 on: March 19, 2013, 14:34 »
0
Ok next problem....next idea modification...

What about setting a system where people can willingly transfer copyrights to that service only in that purpose of defending their work, so one service or a person running it could legally represent all of us who joined and get signature to speak in the name of any outor that joined...

Those collections are huge sometimes , if only people from the forum joined im sure someones work would be there....what are the opposite chances ?  Whenever someone opened topic like that i find something mine there...and u ?

Its sure beats this nothing we have now.


Maybe someone wit more knowledge in that legal direction can think a way to make it work.

If you are able to formulate a plan based on this idea, you need to be certain that the copyrights are transferred properly.  Failure to do just that contributed to Righthaven's eventual downfall....

ImageRights, based in Boston, makes a business of pursuing infringers.  They offer a number of plans; when last I checked a few days ago, one of the plans involved no cost until you find a case that's worth pursuing, and (if I recall correctly) even then the fees seemed reasonable to me.  They seem to have a good name, and there has been some discussion on the Alamy forum that describes favourable experiences...  I'll dig up the link if anyone is interested.

Regards

« Reply #192 on: March 19, 2013, 14:40 »
0
To make centralized place to persue copyright infringements is an illusion and cannot be done. So just forget about it.

For the following reasons:
1.. False claims, or claims not valid.
2.. Copyright laws not the same in all countries
3.. Rule of law not efficient in all countries.

You will need a horde of lawyers to look into every 10 dollar case.
Not at all viable.

« Reply #193 on: March 19, 2013, 15:20 »
0
And that's fine, lots of people have issues with their pricing. But why jump into false accusations and conspiracy theories? Why not just say you don't like their pricing and think they're bad for business?

I think its fair to say a lot of contributors read these forums. If any part of my previous posts (or false accusations according to you) prevents a contributor from signing up on vectorstock, I feel it is a small victory for everyone involved in this industry.

What would be the difference between vectorstock and SS if they had the same images? Cheaper price for the buyer. I am not talking about what goes in your pocket this month. Buyers dictate where this industry is going. The more contributors hear stories of how much money your making off this site, the more will join which will lesson your current downloads but attract new buyers due to a bigger library.

I will tell you another wild conspiracy theory. You know who's a resident of new zealand? Kim Dotcom, the owner of MegaUpload (the site that got shut down). How did they make hundreds of millions? off stolen copyrighted content. There's a whole network of unscrupulous businesses operating online and i sure don't need any proof to know that.


EmberMike

« Reply #194 on: March 19, 2013, 18:21 »
0
I think its fair to say a lot of contributors read these forums. If any part of my previous posts (or false accusations according to you) prevents a contributor from signing up on vectorstock, I feel it is a small victory for everyone involved in this industry...

And you're ok with your small victory being won with false information?

...I will tell you another wild conspiracy theory. You know who's a resident of new zealand? Kim Dotcom, the owner of MegaUpload (the site that got shut down). How did they make hundreds of millions? off stolen copyrighted content. There's a whole network of unscrupulous businesses operating online and i sure don't need any proof to know that.

So any company out of NZ that deals in images or intellectual property shouldn't be trusted? What are you saying?


Poncke

« Reply #195 on: March 22, 2013, 02:15 »
0
Just send a DMCA to the ISP of VS if you find blatant infringement

« Reply #196 on: March 22, 2013, 12:11 »
0
Just send a DMCA to the ISP of VS if you find blatant infringement
What or who is VS?

« Reply #197 on: March 22, 2013, 12:21 »
0
Just send a DMCA to the ISP of VS if you find blatant infringement
What or who is VS?
Vectorstock

« Reply #198 on: March 22, 2013, 12:43 »
0
Just send a DMCA to the ISP of VS if you find blatant infringement
What or who is VS?
Vectorstock
Thanks, it's getting a little much with all the abbreviations... Especially if one is not submitting to them.

Poncke

« Reply #199 on: March 22, 2013, 13:07 »
0
Just send a DMCA to the ISP of VS if you find blatant infringement
What or who is VS?
Vectorstock
Thanks, it's getting a little much with all the abbreviations... Especially if one is not submitting to them.
Sorry mate. I meant VectorStock indeed.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
2932 Views
Last post November 02, 2006, 07:52
by FunkMaster5
33 Replies
7749 Views
Last post September 09, 2011, 16:00
by cathyslife
88 Replies
13867 Views
Last post January 30, 2013, 16:50
by Poncke
15 Replies
3190 Views
Last post March 21, 2014, 13:35
by tickstock
24 Replies
8397 Views
Last post May 23, 2014, 12:22
by Maximilian

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors