MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Photaki - the next crook?  (Read 26998 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: February 05, 2016, 15:05 »
+6
A big part of the problem is, we can't even understand the 'model'.  I see a thread about 'the next crook', read a dozen posts, and can't even figure out what this new site is doing. Something about scraping supposedly 'free' images from other sites, or maybe via an API, or maybe they're submitted by 'designers', and they're attributed, or not, or they're free, or they're paying .001 cent per download, and they're responsible for plagiarism, or they're not, and someone demanded Photaki take down their images, and they said they would, but they didn't, or maybe they did but they showed up again.

The way these 'redistributors' win is by wearing us down.   Bottom line, DMCA puts the responsibility on the victim, and nobody has the time to run down all the possible infringements on the planet, or figure out the latest convoluted 'business model' which seems to me - on the surface - to be yet another 'model' for making money by reselling the work of other people, thinly repackaged, without their knowledge, while skating just inside some zone of legality, according to someone's interpretation. .

If anyone manages to figure out Freepik, please lay it out for the rest of us. 
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 16:25 by stockastic »


Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #51 on: February 05, 2016, 15:39 »
+1
Okay. Freepik make most of their cash via sending people to SS plus a little from subscriptions. The benefit for the subscriber is that they won't have to attribute if they pay for a subscription. That is where their income comes from.

The problem is the work on the site. Up until recently the library was mostly made up of work they pulled off of other sites via a search engine. Many of the sites they index are, some would say, questionable.

On to the present library. They claim to no longer add work from these other sites, but still have work from them as linked to in this and other threads. They also have a large staff producing "original" work. Again see previous examples and make your mind up about how original.  Finally they have also started approaching artists to contribute work for x amount per 1000 downloads.

That is the model. I am sure feepik will correct me if I am wrong.  Their library is there for you to examine and compare to SS. You can make up your own mind if you want to accept payment from a company that has built it's traffic in this way.

Eta "freepik" so it is clear which site I am referring to.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 16:29 by Justanotherphotographer »

« Reply #52 on: February 05, 2016, 15:57 »
0
Is the 80% the .001 same deal? http://www.photaki.com/make-money

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #53 on: February 05, 2016, 16:23 »
0
Photaki is something else, but has the same owner. My post is in answer to the question about freepik

« Reply #54 on: February 05, 2016, 16:25 »
0
Photaki is something else, but has the same owner. My post is in answer to the question about freepik

See what I mean about confusing?  I'll correct my previous post.

« Reply #55 on: February 05, 2016, 18:37 »
0
I would guess to say they have an agreement with shutterstock that the traffic they bring to SS for new users and downloads gives them a certain commission off the sale.
Everyone wants free stuff but when they see what is available to purchase and if it is right for a project of sorts, they will shell out the money to get that image.
I just searched one query and my image was second on the shutterstock sponsored images that came up. If this avenue is bringing in more sales to me on shutterstock, it's hard for me to complain but I do worry about copying other artists work and trying to keep the sales within that site to take the bigger cut. Thank God I make stuff that's hard to copy.

« Reply #56 on: February 05, 2016, 19:12 »
0
There was something about using Google AdSense in the info I read, that would bring in a bit of money.  Still doesn't make me want to try it.

« Reply #57 on: February 06, 2016, 14:08 »
+3
How about the fact that there are 9,000 copies of your same image floating around on the web without any credits?

« Reply #58 on: February 06, 2016, 22:19 »
+1
How about the fact that there are 9,000 copies of your same image floating around on the web without any credits?

Once you upload to any microstock site and set your work out into the web, you have lost ownership and control. I don't see how people think they can have any ownership once they upload and sell out to the middle or low sites. These places have all the rights and you have just sold out.

People in search of will 25c pimp their work anyplace and then wonder why it's stolen and resold on 9000 other places, with no credit. Top Tier - Big 4 or stop your crying about theft.


« Reply #59 on: February 07, 2016, 02:28 »
+6
1- 9000 images downloaded... who and where people have credited... do you have any proofs?

2- If they were in subscription, so they do not require any attribution.. so according to you we have sold (given free) 1 image 9000 times and have freely given 9000 commercial without attribution licenses. Now users will use this design as they want. So according to the deal we have given 9000 commercial licenses for merely $45...

3- Are we destroying the industry?

4- I am sure people sometimes earn $70-$100 in single download from shutterstock, now guess if we get 9000 same downloads at ss.

5- Who is really making money here? freepik or designers? and the main question is...  is it really about money here?

6- There are lot of designs which are exact copy (not plagarism.. exact copy) of other users from various websites. When someone shares the link to you,  you guys say that it is inevitable and we are very very sorry...?? man if we upload 100s of other users designs to shutterstock and say sorry to them and say it is inevitable.. do you think shutterstock will wipe tears of designers who lost their designs in such scam.

7- Its a old website started from design robbery and now trying to coverup things..? This is what I can see right now.

8 - Can I die peacefully in this world  >:(

Edit:
What you guys have to say for this.. I am sorry ?
"http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/60919-another-site-with-tons-of-stolen-illustrations"

P.S. I am afraid of lawsuits and lawyers
« Last Edit: February 07, 2016, 02:37 by CrFx »

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #60 on: February 07, 2016, 03:05 »
+1
Also what happens when a buyer licenses your work for cash on another site then finds out they could have got it for free? Refund at a minimum, also a very annoyed buyer who wont be buying any more images.

« Reply #61 on: February 07, 2016, 05:21 »
+1
How about the fact that there are 9,000 copies of your same image floating around on the web without any credits?

Once you upload to any microstock site and set your work out into the web, you have lost ownership and control. I don't see how people think they can have any ownership once they upload and sell out to the middle or low sites. These places have all the rights and you have just sold out.

People in search of will 25c pimp their work anyplace and then wonder why it's stolen and resold on 9000 other places, with no credit. Top Tier - Big 4 or stop your crying about theft.
I disagree, the thieves mostly use istock and SS.  They probably use stolen credit card details until somebody notices.  Some of them have even advertised their stolen images as SS or istock collections.



Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #64 on: February 07, 2016, 10:15 »
0
I think the photo may have been uploaded by the owner. Just by the user name on freepik.

« Reply #65 on: February 07, 2016, 10:42 »
+8
a lot of money? 0.005c per download. are you sick in the head?


Please, read this interview: http://www.freepik.com/blog/kirsty-pargeter-how-to-earn-money-with-your-designs/


You mean: ad disguised as an interview, surely? Why would anyone who sells at SS, Fotolia or iStock also be a contributor for Freepik? It's even worse than shooting yourself in the foot. She must be getting paid for this interview, or she is completely clueless.

Also, the copycatting and plagiarism is a major issue on this site and therefore it should be taken down immediately. Freepik is a disgrace to the industry. They even dare to threaten us with lawyers, while it's us that should be suing them.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2016, 10:46 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #66 on: February 07, 2016, 12:12 »
+6
Vector

Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-121913818/stock-vector-vector-illustration-of-a-single-detailed-security-camera-icon-isolated-on-soft-background.html?src=RqtuFZtSjYbeWG_gUfp4pg-1-33

Freepik: http://www.freepik.com/free-vector/realistic-camera-lens_789214.htm#term=photo&page=3&position=36

Photo

Creative Market: https://creativemarket.com/Bells/44448-Remember-when-film-was-developed

FreePik: http://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cartoon-stickers_758481.htm#term=photo&page=6&position=6


Unbelievable how that guy can come in here and threaten legal action when he himself should be looking in a mirror. I hope SS takes some action. This is utterly disgusting.


Just hot air I'm sure.   What's really disgusting is seeing SS steadily deteriorate by taking on shadowy "partners", who in turn have even more shadowy "designers", and so on. 


Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #67 on: February 07, 2016, 12:27 »
0
I think the photo may have been uploaded by the owner. Just by the user name on freepik.

Yes, could be. Sad, then. I guess there's no way to tell if you're losing sales in one place because you're giving your work away for free in another. I did see some Unsplash photos on FreePik, but again, maybe the Unsplash people are also uploading there, since they give their photos away free anyway.

It's a sad business model all around. But at least they're deleting copies of our work as we point it out.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2016, 12:36 by Shelma1 »


« Reply #69 on: February 09, 2016, 09:36 »
0
Vector

Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-121913818/stock-vector-vector-illustration-of-a-single-detailed-security-camera-icon-isolated-on-soft-background.html?src=RqtuFZtSjYbeWG_gUfp4pg-1-33

Freepik: http://www.freepik.com/free-vector/realistic-camera-lens_789214.htm#term=photo&page=3&position=36

Photo

Creative Market: https://creativemarket.com/Bells/44448-Remember-when-film-was-developed

FreePik: http://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cartoon-stickers_758481.htm#term=photo&page=6&position=6


Shelma, the author of this image (http://www.freepik.com/free-vector/realistic-camera-lens_789214.htm) is contributor of Freepik, and we have the distribution rights for this image. Please, if you have any plagiarism case of your work, send it us, but if you are looking for examples of other authors note that we have many contributors before falsely accusing.

The second example, as others have said, is content indexed by Freepik from http://gratisography.com


« Reply #70 on: February 09, 2016, 11:15 »
0
Hi! Interesting. Are you partners also of soso.nipic.com?

« Reply #71 on: February 09, 2016, 13:01 »
0
@Freepik, do you accept photos, icons or psd, png files from contributors also?
Thank you.

« Reply #72 on: February 09, 2016, 15:25 »
+4
@Freepik, do you accept photos, icons or psd, png files from contributors also?
Thank you.

You actually want to send your work to these people...??!!!!

« Reply #73 on: February 09, 2016, 16:05 »
0
@Freepik, do you accept photos, icons or psd, png files from contributors also?
Thank you.

You actually want to send your work to these people...??!!!!

1. Just asking.
2. Long time ago (~8-10 years) I've uploaded about 1K images to Morguefile and to shc.hu, just to donate for free images that no one stock agency accepted: too small size or some other problems. Anyway they're sitting there and are being downloaded daily without any revenue to me.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2016, 10:35 by 4seasons »

« Reply #74 on: February 10, 2016, 14:03 »
+4
Vector

Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-121913818/stock-vector-vector-illustration-of-a-single-detailed-security-camera-icon-isolated-on-soft-background.html?src=RqtuFZtSjYbeWG_gUfp4pg-1-33

Freepik: http://www.freepik.com/free-vector/realistic-camera-lens_789214.htm#term=photo&page=3&position=36

Photo

Creative Market: https://creativemarket.com/Bells/44448-Remember-when-film-was-developed

FreePik: http://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cartoon-stickers_758481.htm#term=photo&page=6&position=6


Shelma, the author of this image (http://www.freepik.com/free-vector/realistic-camera-lens_789214.htm) is contributor of Freepik, and we have the distribution rights for this image. Please, if you have any plagiarism case of your work, send it us, but if you are looking for examples of other authors note that we have many contributors before falsely accusing.

The second example, as others have said, is content indexed by Freepik from http://gratisography.com


Artists have the same pictures on SS for money and free on freepik to compete with them self? How odd.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
18 Replies
12210 Views
Last post October 13, 2011, 03:53
by Deyan Georgiev Photography
5 Replies
5047 Views
Last post December 15, 2010, 08:18
by fxegs
31 Replies
25396 Views
Last post April 27, 2017, 12:18
by JimP
6 Replies
5677 Views
Last post February 24, 2016, 15:45
by stockastic

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors