MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Foundstock is back and all our SS images are being given away for free  (Read 18707 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #50 on: December 11, 2017, 03:59 »
+12
I reported yesterday to SS, and today regarding the new site posted. just got a response back from SS:

Thank you for writing in.

Shutterstock aggressively enforces the intellectual property rights of its community of contributors and does not tolerate infringement or piracy of any kind. We investigate every claim of infringement of Shutterstock's or its contributors' intellectual property rights and take appropriate steps, including the institution of legal action.

We are aware of this website. However, we cannot provide specific details about our enforcement efforts. Please know that Shutterstock's anti-piracy efforts are ongoing and we appreciate the input and patience of our contributors as we work to combat this global issue.

Best Regards,
Carl
Shutterstock Compliance

I have also sent a request to have my account closed.I am VERY sick and tired of companies making millions and billions of $$ and not giving a crap about protecting our assets, I know the horse has left the barn, but clearly they have no intention of fixing the problem, as it has been going on for awhile. Not only am I losing sales from shutterstock, but also from any other site where my images are for sale.  >:( >:( >:(

Thank you Cathy for taking a stand. About time. WE........Let this happen. there have been warnings for years and No one said a * thing. If we don't stand up Now. we are done.
remember the Dollar Photo club we stood up. this is a 100 times worse.

What did you do to take a stand then? I dont think you have ever deleted one image? You rant on a forum, you send emails to Jon. Sorry, but I have never seen you taken a real stand for as long as I am in Microstock since 2012. And I apologise if I've missed something.

I took a stand with Dollar Club, I wrote to every possible government body and organisation in the EU who would deal with copyright and artist rights and I got my account closed as a result.

I closed my Istock account when the Google thing happened,

I deleted 95% of my portfolio when Deposit started selling our images for 3% royalty.

I closed my Phanter account when they started messing about.

I stopped uploading to all other agencies, trying to figure out what to do with my images.

My earnings are down from 1000 a month to 300 a month because of this. And I need money badly with young twins in Ireland, its costly to maintain them.

I actually turned down a job in Ireland working for Getty on their sales team when they approached me. Never will I work for crooks like them.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #51 on: December 11, 2017, 04:03 »
+6
As for hack sites, take one down, two will pop up.

And I think the problem is entirely with SS not securing their images. The problem is that the 1000px images do not have a watermark when sitting on their server. The watermark is generated when the preview is requested. Thats how/why every contributor has their own unique watermark.  These hack sites just pull the image from the server before the watermark is generated. These images on the server should be better protected, something needs to be done by SS to prevent an unwatermarked image to be pulled from their server.

« Reply #52 on: December 11, 2017, 08:53 »
+5
Not sure if you are talking to me or rinderart, but for now I have taken my images offline from SS until they fix their code. If they don't, I will close my account. This problem isn't new, they have had plenty of time to deal with it. I am only at two sites now, SS being one. Free images being advertised (by people posting links even on this forum!) means cutting into the decent sales I have on the other site too. And yes, it's like playing whack-a-mole with thieves, but I will take action with my portfolios as I see fit. Sales have dropped drastically at SS (it is no wonder) so it's not like my taking action is hurting my sales any more than they have already been hurt. I don't really care whether you or anyone here approves of my business, it is my decision. Since I have started in micro in 2005, I have taken a lot of stands, but I never do it because I think I am going to cripple one of these million-dollar companies... I am a nobody to them. I do it for my own peace of mind.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #53 on: December 11, 2017, 15:58 »
+3
I was clearly asking the other person.

« Reply #54 on: December 11, 2017, 16:07 »
0
I was clearly asking the other person.
Clearly? Both my and Laurins post were quoted, so...  :D By the way, welcome back.  ;)

« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 17:02 by cathyslife »

JimP

« Reply #55 on: December 11, 2017, 17:31 »
+1
Not sure if you are talking to me or rinderart, but for now I have taken my images offline from SS until they fix their code. If they don't, I will close my account. This problem isn't new, they have had plenty of time to deal with it. I am only at two sites now, SS being one. Free images being advertised (by people posting links even on this forum!) means cutting into the decent sales I have on the other site too. And yes, it's like playing whack-a-mole with thieves, but I will take action with my portfolios as I see fit. Sales have dropped drastically at SS (it is no wonder) so it's not like my taking action is hurting my sales any more than they have already been hurt. I don't really care whether you or anyone here approves of my business, it is my decision. Since I have started in micro in 2005, I have taken a lot of stands, but I never do it because I think I am going to cripple one of these million-dollar companies... I am a nobody to them. I do it for my own peace of mind.

Let me try a different way of my view. I don't see how cutting my income in half, just because someone might give away one of my images, is a better way to work and earn. I also don't see any direct effect from these free sites, anywhere. You and some others are saying, just because there's a threat that someone could steal a small image, you'll shut down your account? What about the people who steal from all the other agencies, will you close all of them?

Since you say you are only on two and hint that the other is nearly as good or better than SS, please tell me. I think that's what I need. I could use a second good agency as FT is 1/3rd of SS.

« Reply #56 on: December 11, 2017, 23:10 »
+1
Not sure if you are talking to me or rinderart, but for now I have taken my images offline from SS until they fix their code. If they don't, I will close my account. This problem isn't new, they have had plenty of time to deal with it. I am only at two sites now, SS being one. Free images being advertised (by people posting links even on this forum!) means cutting into the decent sales I have on the other site too. And yes, it's like playing whack-a-mole with thieves, but I will take action with my portfolios as I see fit. Sales have dropped drastically at SS (it is no wonder) so it's not like my taking action is hurting my sales any more than they have already been hurt. I don't really care whether you or anyone here approves of my business, it is my decision. Since I have started in micro in 2005, I have taken a lot of stands, but I never do it because I think I am going to cripple one of these million-dollar companies... I am a nobody to them. I do it for my own peace of mind.

Let me try a different way of my view. I don't see how cutting my income in half, just because someone might give away one of my images, is a better way to work and earn. I also don't see any direct effect from these free sites, anywhere. You and some others are saying, just because there's a threat that someone could steal a small image, you'll shut down your account? What about the people who steal from all the other agencies, will you close all of them?

Since you say you are only on two and hint that the other is nearly as good or better than SS, please tell me. I think that's what I need. I could use a second good agency as FT is 1/3rd of SS.

That's not a good point, you should speak your voice and take necessary actions whenever needed.

« Reply #57 on: December 12, 2017, 04:40 »
+6
Let's not get sidetracked. This is all about how indifferently Shutterstock deals with the pest sites that steal our work. Don't be fooled, don't explain on Shutterstock's behalf. That is called Stockholm syndrome.

There are no degrees on stealing. If someone breaks into your house and steals your computer, are you happy they did not steal all your electronics and valuables? Are you happy that they stole only little but not a lot? Will you not report this, because it was only a little bit of thieving?

If somebody steals a small image or large image, it is stealing plain and simple. We must maintain ZERO TOLERANCE on stealing!

JimP

« Reply #58 on: December 12, 2017, 09:01 »
+1
Not sure if you are talking to me or rinderart, but for now I have taken my images offline from SS until they fix their code. If they don't, I will close my account. This problem isn't new, they have had plenty of time to deal with it. I am only at two sites now, SS being one. Free images being advertised (by people posting links even on this forum!) means cutting into the decent sales I have on the other site too. And yes, it's like playing whack-a-mole with thieves, but I will take action with my portfolios as I see fit. Sales have dropped drastically at SS (it is no wonder) so it's not like my taking action is hurting my sales any more than they have already been hurt. I don't really care whether you or anyone here approves of my business, it is my decision. Since I have started in micro in 2005, I have taken a lot of stands, but I never do it because I think I am going to cripple one of these million-dollar companies... I am a nobody to them. I do it for my own peace of mind.

Let me try a different way of my view. I don't see how cutting my income in half, just because someone might give away one of my images, is a better way to work and earn. I also don't see any direct effect from these free sites, anywhere. You and some others are saying, just because there's a threat that someone could steal a small image, you'll shut down your account? What about the people who steal from all the other agencies, will you close all of them?

Since you say you are only on two and hint that the other is nearly as good or better than SS, please tell me. I think that's what I need. I could use a second good agency as FT is 1/3rd of SS.

That's not a good point, you should speak your voice and take necessary actions whenever needed.

Cutting my income in half is a good thing then? Just like Cathy I don't think SS would notice if I closed my accout or disabled all my images, which means, empty protest that only harms me and makes no difference.

Let's not get sidetracked. This is all about how indifferently Shutterstock deals with the pest sites that steal our work. Don't be fooled, don't explain on Shutterstock's behalf. That is called Stockholm syndrome.

There are no degrees on stealing. If someone breaks into your house and steals your computer, are you happy they did not steal all your electronics and valuables? Are you happy that they stole only little but not a lot? Will you not report this, because it was only a little bit of thieving?

If somebody steals a small image or large image, it is stealing plain and simple. We must maintain ZERO TOLERANCE on stealing!

I hope you didn't mean that for me, I'm always standing up for our rights and when agencies try to cut us, cheat on our share or lower earnings, I'm the last one to defend them. This is a problem that the agency didn't create and that they would like to end, as much as us. Accusing them or doing nothing is kind of odd. Every free image stolen comes from their pockets, 80% more then ours. And it's ever picture, not just maybe one of mine. I don't know that one image has been stolen by any of these sites, why should I close my account? Keep in mine the agency doesn't care or notice and it only hurts me to stop selling on SS.

I've already dropped many others because of policies I don't agree with or what I felt was treating us unfairly.

« Reply #59 on: December 12, 2017, 09:15 »
+1
Not sure if you are talking to me or rinderart, but for now I have taken my images offline from SS until they fix their code. If they don't, I will close my account. This problem isn't new, they have had plenty of time to deal with it. I am only at two sites now, SS being one. Free images being advertised (by people posting links even on this forum!) means cutting into the decent sales I have on the other site too. And yes, it's like playing whack-a-mole with thieves, but I will take action with my portfolios as I see fit. Sales have dropped drastically at SS (it is no wonder) so it's not like my taking action is hurting my sales any more than they have already been hurt. I don't really care whether you or anyone here approves of my business, it is my decision. Since I have started in micro in 2005, I have taken a lot of stands, but I never do it because I think I am going to cripple one of these million-dollar companies... I am a nobody to them. I do it for my own peace of mind.

Let me try a different way of my view. I don't see how cutting my income in half, just because someone might give away one of my images, is a better way to work and earn. I also don't see any direct effect from these free sites, anywhere. You and some others are saying, just because there's a threat that someone could steal a small image, you'll shut down your account? What about the people who steal from all the other agencies, will you close all of them?

Since you say you are only on two and hint that the other is nearly as good or better than SS, please tell me. I think that's what I need. I could use a second good agency as FT is 1/3rd of SS.

That's not a good point, you should speak your voice and take necessary actions whenever needed.

He just told you what his position is.  It's not to cut off his nose to spite his face. Besides that, what would you recommend?

« Reply #60 on: December 12, 2017, 09:20 »
+3
SS seems to have problems with secure coding.

This morning, Firefox didn't want to go to their forum, because the code was not secure.

*sigh*

« Reply #61 on: December 12, 2017, 09:20 »
+4
mcirostock is a big part of my income, i cant just close accounts left right and centre and so it puts me in a difficult place, do i accept what the agencies do, or will i fight back costing me my earnings. i admire people closing their accounts, i just cant, working on plan b takes time as well. but thats what i am doing, slowly trying to decrease the % of earnings from microstock and increase the income elsewehre

« Reply #62 on: December 12, 2017, 10:31 »
+3
mcirostock is a big part of my income, i cant just close accounts left right and centre and so it puts me in a difficult place, do i accept what the agencies do, or will i fight back costing me my earnings. i admire people closing their accounts, i just cant, working on plan b takes time as well. but thats what i am doing, slowly trying to decrease the % of earnings from microstock and increase the income elsewehre


That sounds like a good plan. Everyone does what is right for themselves.

« Reply #63 on: December 12, 2017, 15:03 »
+3
mcirostock is a big part of my income, i cant just close accounts left right and centre and so it puts me in a difficult place, do i accept what the agencies do, or will i fight back costing me my earnings. i admire people closing their accounts, i just cant, working on plan b takes time as well. but thats what i am doing, slowly trying to decrease the % of earnings from microstock and increase the income elsewehre


That sounds like a good plan. Everyone does what is right for themselves.

That's the way I see it too Cathy, we all decide for ourselves. I don't think any protest, dropping, closing or not uploading, is noticed by any of them. Writing messages on forums posting on FB or tweets and exposing the issues will get more noticed and maybe warn people of what's going on.

« Reply #64 on: December 14, 2017, 14:10 »
0
Any news from SS on this?
It doesnt seem to be mentioned in SS forums?
If SS had random watermarks, like some other sites, I assume this wouldnt have been an issue?
« Last Edit: December 14, 2017, 14:13 by BigLeague »

« Reply #65 on: December 14, 2017, 16:56 »
0
Any news from SS on this?
It doesnt seem to be mentioned in SS forums?
If SS had random watermarks, like some other sites, I assume this wouldnt have been an issue?

As far as I am aware Shutterstock are currently on top of the situation, unless you know differently?
SS has banned mention of this on their forums, deleting threads when they appear.
How do buyers obtain images without watermarks, this is effectively what the thieves are doing. It shouldn't be an issue, just Shutterstock being inept.

« Reply #66 on: December 17, 2017, 02:36 »
+1
Ok F%"$& it seems that most of my port is there as well. Plus its scary how well this corresponds to my sales in SS suddenly falling to zero.

What are we doing? Have mailed SS on this


Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #67 on: December 17, 2017, 09:04 »
0
One more reason to submit premium images to Midstock, especially as RM.

« Reply #68 on: December 17, 2017, 11:02 »
+3
One more reason to submit premium images to Midstock, especially as RM.

On Alamy, which can be considered traditional/midstock, RM never gave me a better sale value average than RF. And I sell there hundreds of images per year.

I do not see a motive to sell RM anymore, especially when agencies don't care about chasing infringements.

« Reply #69 on: December 18, 2017, 12:56 »
0
All my images too :(

« Reply #70 on: December 18, 2017, 13:37 »
0
I have found an image from my collection on a website
But how can i check, if the purchased legally or stolen from an site like foundstock.com?

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #71 on: December 18, 2017, 14:16 »
0
I think your best approach is to get a lawyer to send them a strongly worded "cease and desist" letter. That will show them!

mediamasterrace

« Reply #72 on: December 18, 2017, 15:34 »
0
SS seems to have problems with secure coding.

This morning, Firefox didn't want to go to their forum, because the code was not secure.

*sigh*

I got this too and tried multiple times and had to add an exception. Thought it was me or my security settings too high, guess not.

mediamasterrace

« Reply #73 on: December 18, 2017, 15:46 »
+2
Any news from SS on this?
It doesnt seem to be mentioned in SS forums?
If SS had random watermarks, like some other sites, I assume this wouldnt have been an issue?

As far as I am aware Shutterstock are currently on top of the situation, unless you know differently?
SS has banned mention of this on their forums, deleting threads when they appear.
How do buyers obtain images without watermarks, this is effectively what the thieves are doing. It shouldn't be an issue, just Shutterstock being inept.

That's disgusting, I suspect SS has banned talk of this and deleted threads because they are well aware of gaping holes in their systems and are afraid of lawsuits, same reason the two other main sites don't like to respond to questions regarding fraud and theft. 

We trust these companies with out video and photo content and I am pretty sure that in law they are liable if they lose it or mishandle it and it gets stolen.  A class action lawsuit could very well happen and they are being super cautious about covering their behinds I think.  They are also super greedy and just can't resist doing these deals with affiliates and partners and whatnot and each one of those sites could have security holes in their systems.

Everyone says we take your data security seriously, so did Target, Equifax, many others and of course that department of national defense that left a whole database sitting on AWS with no password.

A class action lawsuit would cost money and admissible evidence needs to be gathered but a tip to as many of the tech media as possible by as many of us possible to let them know what's going on might generate some investigation and coverage, techcrunch, bleepingcomputer, thehackernews, and many more.  No one likes bad publicity and right now these companies are laughing at us all the way to the bank as our commissions are cut and now our content stolen, they are literally laughing at us, they won't be laughing so hard when this hits the tech news.

« Reply #74 on: December 18, 2017, 16:06 »
+2
Any news from SS on this?
It doesnt seem to be mentioned in SS forums?
If SS had random watermarks, like some other sites, I assume this wouldnt have been an issue?

As far as I am aware Shutterstock are currently on top of the situation, unless you know differently?
SS has banned mention of this on their forums, deleting threads when they appear.
How do buyers obtain images without watermarks, this is effectively what the thieves are doing. It shouldn't be an issue, just Shutterstock being inept.

That's disgusting, I suspect SS has banned talk of this and deleted threads because they are well aware of gaping holes in their systems and are afraid of lawsuits, same reason the two other main sites don't like to respond to questions regarding fraud and theft. 

We trust these companies with out video and photo content and I am pretty sure that in law they are liable if they lose it or mishandle it and it gets stolen.  A class action lawsuit could very well happen and they are being super cautious about covering their behinds I think.  They are also super greedy and just can't resist doing these deals with affiliates and partners and whatnot and each one of those sites could have security holes in their systems.

Everyone says we take your data security seriously, so did Target, Equifax, many others and of course that department of national defense that left a whole database sitting on AWS with no password.

A class action lawsuit would cost money and admissible evidence needs to be gathered but a tip to as many of the tech media as possible by as many of us possible to let them know what's going on might generate some investigation and coverage, techcrunch, bleepingcomputer, thehackernews, and many more.  No one likes bad publicity and right now these companies are laughing at us all the way to the bank as our commissions are cut and now our content stolen, they are literally laughing at us, they won't be laughing so hard when this hits the tech news.


What I don't get is that these thieves hurt SSs bottom line too. I would think they would want to find a fix.  I am baffled.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1573 Views
Last post May 28, 2007, 07:25
by rjmiz
61 Replies
13569 Views
Last post February 04, 2009, 03:47
by dirkr
0 Replies
1266 Views
Last post March 27, 2013, 15:58
by Sylvia - YAY Images
21 Replies
4501 Views
Last post April 17, 2014, 07:56
by Noedelhap
9 Replies
1629 Views
Last post February 15, 2015, 10:44
by RuthBlack

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors