Author Topic: Why is DT being stupid? (Read 39150 times)

daniel_mouritsen · « **Reply #75 on:** April 07, 2009, 18:31 »

The 6 months are fair play, you're agreeing to it when signing up. The "you have to delete the pictures one by one" part is a bit... "somebody needs to grow up"-ish

just my two pennies

disorderly · « **Reply #76 on:** April 07, 2009, 18:39 »

Quote from: RT on April 07, 2009, 18:14

Re your other comment, I'm pretty sure you're wrong about in the USA the person that presses the shutter being the copyright holder,

Quoting from Apogee Photo Magazine:

"Under the provisions of the revised copyright law, a photographer owns all rights to his pictures at the moment of creation. That means he and he alone owns the right to sell, use, distribute, copy, publish, alter or destroy his work of art. If you are a photographer, this ownership begins the moment you click the shutter."

The article then goes on to discuss the Work For Hire exception.

null · « **Reply #77 on:** April 07, 2009, 19:05 »

Quote from: sharply_done on April 07, 2009, 17:34

He said "disable", not "delete".

Correction: disable-all button. The images get erased 3 months later, but as soon as they are disabled, they are not for sale any more.

Quote from: sharply_done on April 07, 2009, 17:34

Surely you know of at least one person whose account has been temporarily disabled as a discipline measure.

To be honest, I don't. But that was not the issue. The issue was that RT stated that DT was committed to provide a disable-all button by the T&C and that's simply not true.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #78 on:** April 07, 2009, 20:28 »

Quote from: sharply_done on April 07, 2009, 16:58

Quote from: RT on April 07, 2009, 16:17
... I also suggest that you read copyright law, it has no similarity to buying a product like a car or a house and to make that comparison is ridiculous.

Copyright law can also vary tremendously by country, too. In Canada, for example, it's the owner of the film/CF card who owns the copyright, while in the USA it's the person who clicked the shutter.

Quote from: RT on April 07, 2009, 14:22
There is another option albeit a bit more drastic, whether Dreamstime have a 6, 12, 18 or 24 month policy in their terms makes no difference whatsoever, you as a contributor are the copyright owner of those images, if you choose to no longer allow Dreamstime to distribute those images then send them a notice giving them 28 days to remove your images from their site ...

Actually in Canada its the person who commissions the work (if its being paid work for a person, corporation, etc.) that owns the copyright to those images even though you may own the film/CF card

This also varies by country. I know of one photographer who signed an agreement with an agency such that the agency has the right to license his imagery for 20 years ! He's consulted with lawyers about getting out of the contract, but has been told it's a no-go.

sharply_done · « **Reply #79 on:** April 08, 2009, 00:06 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on April 07, 2009, 19:05

To be honest, I don't. But that was not the issue. The issue was that RT stated that DT was committed to provide a disable-all button by the T&C and that's simply not true.

I think he was saying that they could disable (=suspend or terminate) an account with click of a button. Though they don't mention the possibility of this in their T&C, the fact is they have threatened people with doing it and have done it to others. The point here is that they indeed have a button to remove all images from public view, but are only willing to press it when it is to their advantage to do so. I can't really fault them for that, either.

RT · « **Reply #80 on:** April 08, 2009, 02:18 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on April 07, 2009, 19:05

The issue was that RT stated that DT was committed to provide a disable-all button by the T&C and that's simply not true.

Flemish,

You're twisting what I've said, Sharply understood it clear enough. I haven't said anything about Dreamstime being committed to provide a disable button, if they were this thread wouldn't exist.

I'll try and explain, Dreamstime can disable an account and remove all images if they so wish, of course they can any site could do that, and they could do it immediately hence my phrase at the press of a button. Now I appreciate that might of confused you and it might take a press of two or maybe three buttons, but it still stands that they could do it, you've mentioned before that you know a bit about website design so I'm sure you'll be well aware how easy it would be to delete an account in a matter of seconds.

But just to make it ultra clear here's the extract from the Dreamstime T&C:

Dreamstime may restrict or remove your access to this site at any time, or restrict or remove the use of any Image for any reason

They can do it, everybody knows they can do it, but they make out that people have to remove images one by one for no other reason than being awkward.

RT · « **Reply #81 on:** April 08, 2009, 02:34 »

Quote from: disorderly on April 07, 2009, 18:39

Quote from: RT on April 07, 2009, 18:14
Re your other comment, I'm pretty sure you're wrong about in the USA the person that presses the shutter being the copyright holder,

Quoting from Apogee Photo Magazine:

"Under the provisions of the revised copyright law, a photographer owns all rights to his pictures at the moment of creation. That means he and he alone owns the right to sell, use, distribute, copy, publish, alter or destroy his work of art. If you are a photographer, this ownership begins the moment you click the shutter."

The article then goes on to discuss the Work For Hire exception.

The part I've highlighted is what I think confuses people, to physically press the shutter button does not make you the photographer and automatic copyright holder, if it did there'd be a lot of very rich photography assistants rushing to see a lawyer

Have a look at this link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/photography/genius/gallery/crewdson.shtml

The guy in question even went on to explain in the programme how he never touches the camera, isn't interested in cameras and wouldn't know how to set it up if asked to, after the shoot they showed him sitting with a woman who does all the editing in photoshop for him, so he actually has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the actual physical making of the photo, he is however still the legal copyright holder because he 'made' the photo.

Caz · « **Reply #82 on:** April 08, 2009, 05:45 »

Quote from: daniel_mouritsen on April 07, 2009, 18:31

The 6 months are fair play, you're agreeing to it when signing up.

When I joined DT there was no 6 month lock in period. That was introduced long after I joined. But when it was introduced it was only applied to new images, so if I didn't upload anything new I was free to leave without notice.
When I went exclusive with iStock I had to delete my portfio, image by image from DT, Shutterstock, Fotolia, BigStock and Stockexpert. None could offer a back office service to delete my portfolio for me, and nor did I expect them to. When I decided to go exclusive, I factored in 20 hours of time to delete my images. They give you the tools to delete your images, just because you'd like the tools to be easier/faster doesn't mean they're being unreasonable.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #83 on:** April 08, 2009, 06:05 »

Quote from: Caz on April 08, 2009, 05:45

Quote from: daniel_mouritsen on April 07, 2009, 18:31
The 6 months are fair play, you're agreeing to it when signing up.

When I joined DT there was no 6 month lock in period. That was introduced long after I joined. But when it was introduced it was only applied to new images, so if I didn't upload anything new I was free to leave without notice.
When I went exclusive with iStock I had to delete my portfio, image by image from DT, Shutterstock, Fotolia, BigStock and Stockexpert. None could offer a back office service to delete my portfolio for me, and nor did I expect them to. When I decided to go exclusive, I factored in 20 hours of time to delete my images. They give you the tools to delete your images, just because you'd like the tools to be easier/faster doesn't mean they're being unreasonable.

Sure they are.

Dear DT, please disable my contributor account and images as I do not wish to sell there anymore. Thanks! Love A. Con. Tributor

How hard is it not to be a jerk about doing that?

Caz · « **Reply #84 on:** April 08, 2009, 06:17 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2009, 06:05

Sure they are.

Dear DT, please disable my contributor account and images as I do not wish to sell there anymore. Thanks! Love A. Con. Tributor

How hard is it not to be a jerk about doing that?

I'm certainly no apologist for DT, but as I don't know their back end system I wouldn't presume it to be a quick thing for them to do. If it is a simple matter of one click and you're history then indeed it would be a friendly extra thing for them to do. But if it took more than 5 minutes of staff time per contributor request, I personally wouldn't expect them to allocate resources to it.

patballard · « **Reply #85 on:** April 08, 2009, 08:35 »

One aspect of this discussion that I hadn't considered is that we're a volatile group. How many of us get mad at different stock agencies and want to withdraw our images. Later, we get the problem worked out or learn to live with it. By making it hard for us to quit an agency, they save themselves tons of time and work in dealing with contributors who who would keep joining and quitting. Just a thought.

Fred · « **Reply #86 on:** April 08, 2009, 08:44 »

Quote from: Caz on April 08, 2009, 06:17

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2009, 06:05
Sure they are.

Dear DT, please disable my contributor account and images as I do not wish to sell there anymore. Thanks! Love A. Con. Tributor

How hard is it not to be a jerk about doing that?

I'm certainly no apologist for DT, but as I don't know their back end system I wouldn't presume it to be a quick thing for them to do. If it is a simple matter of one click and you're history then indeed it would be a friendly extra thing for them to do. But if it took more than 5 minutes of staff time per contributor request, I personally wouldn't expect them to allocate resources to it.

A site would be foolish not to be able to disable an account very quickly. Legal issues - especially copyright abuse and liability - could easily arise that would require it. fred

disorderly · « **Reply #87 on:** April 08, 2009, 08:59 »

Quote from: RT on April 08, 2009, 02:34

The guy in question even went on to explain in the programme how he never touches the camera, isn't interested in cameras and wouldn't know how to set it up if asked to, after the shoot they showed him sitting with a woman who does all the editing in photoshop for him, so he actually has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the actual physical making of the photo, he is however still the legal copyright holder because he 'made' the photo.

If he is indeed the copyright holder, it is only because he has Work For Hire contracts with his staff that make him so. Absent such a contract, the person who presses the shutter is the copyright holder according to US law.

Caz · « **Reply #88 on:** April 08, 2009, 10:11 »

Quote from: Fred on April 08, 2009, 08:44

A site would be foolish not to be able to disable an account very quickly. Legal issues - especially copyright abuse and liability - could easily arise that would require it. fred

Indeed, but as we've seen on several occasions, the success of some microstock sites appears to have outpaced their infrastructure. I wouldn't fall off my chair in amazement if procedures we assume to be automated and/or easy to do on all the sites just aren't.

RT · « **Reply #89 on:** April 08, 2009, 14:04 »

Quote from: disorderly on April 08, 2009, 08:59

Quote from: RT on April 08, 2009, 02:34
The guy in question even went on to explain in the programme how he never touches the camera, isn't interested in cameras and wouldn't know how to set it up if asked to, after the shoot they showed him sitting with a woman who does all the editing in photoshop for him, so he actually has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the actual physical making of the photo, he is however still the legal copyright holder because he 'made' the photo.

If he is indeed the copyright holder, it is only because he has Work For Hire contracts with his staff that make him so. Absent such a contract, the person who presses the shutter is the copyright holder according to US law.

You're nearly there but not quite.

batman · « **Reply #90 on:** April 08, 2009, 20:28 »

I think we're deviating from Ichiro's original topic here. Not sure if he enjoys having it hijacked

Anyway, I checked and found out that Dreams is not the only site that makes it difficult to delete your images. BigStock, Crestock, Moodboard,are also 3 I've found out that not only you cannot disable or delete it yourself, you have to write them.
Of the Big 6+3 ,seems like Fotolia and IS are the only two I know that actually allow you to delete by yourself. Alamy requires an email to support.
Correct me if I am wrong.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #91 on:** April 09, 2009, 10:55 »

Quote from: batman on April 08, 2009, 20:28

I think we're deviating from Ichiro's original topic here. Not sure if he enjoys having it hijacked

Anyway, I checked and found out that Dreams is not the only site that makes it difficult to delete your images. BigStock, Crestock, Moodboard,are also 3 I've found out that not only you cannot disable or delete it yourself, you have to write them.
Of the Big 6+3 ,seems like Fotolia and IS are the only two I know that actually allow you to delete by yourself. Alamy requires an email to support.
Correct me if I am wrong.

You are wrong.

Alamy you can remove your photos from the active status / disable them, and it takes six months for them to go away. You don't need to write support. Basically you "mark for deletion" then wait six months.

"You can revisit your images to add or delete images, change keywords and pseudonyms at any time."

batman · « **Reply #92 on:** April 09, 2009, 13:59 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on April 09, 2009, 10:55

Alamy you can remove your photos from the active status / disable them, and it takes six months for them to go away. You don't need to write support. Basically you "mark for deletion" then wait six months.

"You can revisit your images to add or delete images, change keywords and pseudonyms at any time."

thx for the tips Race. (sorry Ich!)

RacePhoto · « **Reply #93 on:** April 09, 2009, 20:04 »

Quote from: batman on April 09, 2009, 13:59

Quote from: RacePhoto on April 09, 2009, 10:55
Alamy you can remove your photos from the active status / disable them, and it takes six months for them to go away. You don't need to write support. Basically you "mark for deletion" then wait six months.

"You can revisit your images to add or delete images, change keywords and pseudonyms at any time."

thx for the tips Race. (sorry Ich!)

Good thing I've never made a mistake on a stock site or how they handle things. Well not in the last 24 hours... maybe.

Freedom · « **Reply #94 on:** April 10, 2009, 10:33 »

In Alamy, although you have to wait for 6 months for the image to disappear from the database, you can delete all the keywords and descriptions so the image will not be searchable anymore.

Bigstock will delete for you, if you email its support.

stockastic · « **Reply #95 on:** April 10, 2009, 12:54 »

This is an important issue and I hope it continues to be a hot topic on this forum. At some point better ways to sell our images are going to come along and we'll be wanting to pull our portfolios from these microstocks and escape . of 25 cent subscription sales. I want to be sure I can do that when the time comes. Everyone who's found it difficult to delete or disable their photos on a stock site, please post. I'm taking names.

batman · « **Reply #96 on:** April 12, 2009, 18:09 »

Quote from: Freedom on April 10, 2009, 10:33

In Alamy, although you have to wait for 6 months for the image to disappear from the database, you can delete all the keywords and descriptions so the image will not be searchable anymore.

Bigstock will delete for you, if you email its support.

freedom, i don't think you can change the keywords, it's greyed out !

null · « **Reply #97 on:** April 12, 2009, 19:56 »

Quote from: stockastic on April 10, 2009, 12:54

Everyone who's found it difficult to delete or disable their photos on a stock site, please post. I'm taking names.

Crestock, Albumo.

pieman · « **Reply #98 on:** April 13, 2009, 12:54 »

For the record, if you close your account with iStock your images are not held in the collection for any period of time after you close your account. If you dump exclusivity your images stay in the collection as they always have.

Note: when you dump exclusivity your status isn't changed to non-exclusive until 30 days after you initiate the process. And for clarity, you can't apply for exclusivity for 90 days after the process is complete.

Yay, I'm in a dreamstime thread kicking the knowledge in a thread that has drifted of the original topic.

batman · « **Reply #99 on:** April 13, 2009, 13:38 »

Quote from: pieman on April 13, 2009, 12:54

For the record, if you close your account with iStock your images are not held in the collection for any period of time after you close your account. If you dump exclusivity your images stay in the collection as they always have.

Note: when you dump exclusivity your status isn't changed to non-exclusive until 30 days after you initiate the process. And for clarity, you can't apply for exclusivity for 90 days after the process is complete.

Yay, I'm in a dreamstime thread kicking the knowledge in a thread that has drifted of the original topic.

interesting.
then what happens after the 90 days? are your once exclusive images sellable with other sites ?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Why is DT being stupid? (Read 39150 times)

daniel_mouritsen

disorderly

null

ichiro17

sharply_done

RT

RT

Caz

Sean Locke Photography

Caz

patballard

Fred

disorderly

Caz

RT

batman

RacePhoto

batman

RacePhoto

Freedom

stockastic

batman

null

pieman

batman

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors