Author Topic: 14 years, 115,000 images, 3rd mistake - Blocked (Read 7287 times)

task150 · « **on:** October 10, 2023, 14:40 »

For the past 14 years, I have collaborated with Adobe, consistently delivering quality content. As of the date of the unexpected block on August 23, I had over 115,000 images in my portfolio. Three weeks later, I learned (not directly from Adobe support) that the block was due to an incorrect use of a trademark in the metadata of one image referencing "Miyazaki's style".

I was informed this was my third infraction. The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar. The second was a lapse in providing complete metadata for a generative AI image. However, these were mere technical oversights, not malicious or fraudulent actions.

Wouldn't it have been more reasonable for Adobe to remove the disputed image and allow me to address these inadvertent errors? Instead, my account remains blocked, depriving me of my livelihood for two months.

Adobe, I deeply value our long-standing partnership and kindly request you to reconsider the decision regarding my account.
Or at the very least, provide responses to my numerous inquiries?

Warm regards.

#Adobe @MatHayward

cosus · « **Reply #1 on:** October 11, 2023, 16:42 »

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40

Adobe, I deeply value our long-standing partnership and kindly request you to reconsider the decision regarding my account.

Here it is clear that what you call "partnership" for Adobe and other sites is not a partnership. Partners respect each other and work things out by agreement. Here, one side uses its significantly stronger position to do whatever it wants. Either of us can be out of income tomorrow and can just beg the higher-ups for mercy.

cobalt · « **Reply #2 on:** October 11, 2023, 16:56 »

OMG, another one of these horror postings. I have no words. 115 000 files. Unbelievable.

I agree, the disrespect in the way producers have to await the „judgement“ of the invisible Adobe court and not knowing how long it takes and being cut of from family income is unbearable.

We believe we are business partners and suppliers and also customers of Adobe. And of all agencies.

But is that real?

I sincerely hope that your case is sorted out extra quickly.

Large portfolios of experienced producers should be preferred.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #3 on:** October 11, 2023, 17:18 »

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40

I was informed this was my third infraction.

I'm obviously very sorry and I don't wish this on anyone,

but I have to say one thing:"no other agency would have ever warned you twice".
I can assure you that the other agencies put contributors out without any warning.

I wish you all the best!

yuriy · « **Reply #4 on:** October 11, 2023, 17:31 »

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40

The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar.

curious about this... was it oak and you said "birch" in the tags or something? i have had a fair number of image come back for "data issues" which seems like a reasonable approach. you get a chance to fix your error (though plenty of times i'm scratching my head trying to figure out what the issue might be).

Artist · « **Reply #5 on:** October 11, 2023, 20:02 »

This is sad. Imagine if any Adobe employee did any mistake, will they fire them on immediate effect or will they give chance for rectification and take it as a part of learning.?

People work hard and with such silly mistakes one should consider giving warning instead of banning them.
Mistakes happens and mistakes are fixed.

blvdone · « **Reply #6 on:** October 11, 2023, 21:22 »

That's horrible. It doesn't make sense.

task150 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2023, 01:32 »

Quote from: yuriy on October 11, 2023, 17:31

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40
The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar.

curious about this... was it oak and you said "birch" in the tags or something? i have had a fair number of image come back for "data issues" which seems like a reasonable approach. you get a chance to fix your error (though plenty of times i'm scratching my head trying to figure out what the issue might be).

These are wooden textures. I purchased various boards, stains, and sandpaper and spent two months creating these textures. I still have some of the resulting panels. Unfortunately, due to the inherent similarity of such textures, I received a ban for uploading similar content

task150 · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2023, 01:39 »

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40

For the past 14 years, I have collaborated with Adobe, consistently delivering quality content. As of the date of the unexpected block on August 23, I had over 115,000 images in my portfolio. Three weeks later, I learned (not directly from Adobe support) that the block was due to an incorrect use of a trademark in the metadata of one image referencing "Miyazaki's style".

I was informed this was my third infraction. The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar. The second was a lapse in providing complete metadata for a generative AI image. However, these were mere technical oversights, not malicious or fraudulent actions.

Wouldn't it have been more reasonable for Adobe to remove the disputed image and allow me to address these inadvertent errors? Instead, my account remains blocked, depriving me of my livelihood for two months.

Adobe, I deeply value our long-standing partnership and kindly request you to reconsider the decision regarding my account.
Or at the very least, provide responses to my numerous inquiries?

Warm regards.

#Adobe @MatHayward

The main issue is that Adobe has keeping me in the dark for nearly two months. It's unclear what steps to take next: whether to delete my account and upload new works, or to wait for further instructions, or to consider other options.

Additionally, it feels as if Adobe's support has become unresponsive; all the emails I send now receive automated replies:
Unfortunately, your request couldn't be answered by our Contributor support team. We apologize for this unusual circumstance.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2023, 05:31 »

Sad to hear this, but our relationship with Adobe (or any other agency) was never a partnership to begin with. Not even an employee (who has benefits and employment laws to protect him). It's a completely one-sided agreement to deliver content in return for royalties, and contributors have to either suck up any policy change or decision from HQ, or leave the agency. To them, you're just an expendable asset, no matter how good your content or sales are.

All I can say is: never put your eggs in one basket.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2023, 06:22 »

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40

[...] depriving me of my livelihood for two months [...]

AI new industry (and all his new AI artists) has started the road for depriving me of my livelihood for eternity. I feel sorry that nobody will cry for me.

gnirtS · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2023, 06:43 »

Im seeing more and more of this happening.

Sometimes its a small, genuine mistake, sometimes its just suspicious buying patterns by an outsider with a stolen credit card.

There seems to be no fair chance to respond and address the issue or expediate the process at all. More and more it seems like anyone could lose their AS account, at any moment, for no clear reason and struggle to get it back, if ever.

The lack of security for contributors now seems worse than shutterstock - all attempts to treat contributors as fair partners appears to have been abandoned.

yuriy · « **Reply #12 on:** October 12, 2023, 09:13 »

Quote from: task150 on October 12, 2023, 01:32

Quote from: yuriy on October 11, 2023, 17:31
Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40
The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar.

curious about this... was it oak and you said "birch" in the tags or something? i have had a fair number of image come back for "data issues" which seems like a reasonable approach. you get a chance to fix your error (though plenty of times i'm scratching my head trying to figure out what the issue might be).

These are wooden textures. I purchased various boards, stains, and sandpaper and spent two months creating these textures. I still have some of the resulting panels. Unfortunately, due to the inherent similarity of such textures, I received a ban for uploading similar content

this is really disconcerting. they have a mechanism of dealing with "similars." just reject them and move on. if you're an obvious spam bot posting 10,000 of the same image that's a different story but it should be clear that's not the case based on your portfolio and upload history. hopefully they'll come to their senses.

Lukeruk · « **Reply #13 on:** October 12, 2023, 12:33 »

I am sad to hear this. For 14 years and 115,000 uploads, there is a really negligible number of mistakes, especially if there was no intention to make them. Making mistakes is in human nature; we make them on a daily basis, and if there is no bad intention, Adobe should reconsider the case.
I hope your account will be unblocked soon.

Wilm · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2023, 12:50 »

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40

The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar.

Recently I needed wood textures for 3D visualizations. These included spruce, pine, larch, meranti and oak (and more).

I have not found any usable textures at AS. There were several reasons for this in combination:
- The algorithm did not show useful results.
- I did not need any planked textures.
- The textures could not contain knotholes.
- The scale did not fit for me.
- For many textures it was not obvious if it was really the exact wood species. Or if there was keyword spamming on the files.

I then bought a texture bundle from a specialty vendor. However, these were not usable because the textures only contained numbers - it was not obvious behind which number, for example, pine or spruce was hidden. I got my money back.

The fact is that pine, spruce and larch in particular have a very similar grain. It is a huge mistake for a stock agency to reject such textures, which are difficult to distinguish, because of similarity.
This has nothing to do with spamming!

I am very sorry for you and I hope that the problem will be solved as soon as possible.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #15 on:** October 12, 2023, 15:11 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on October 12, 2023, 05:31

All I can say is: never put your eggs in one basket.

I agree with you,or at least I used to,but from my point of view I see that things have changed.

I see a clear decline in sales on all agencies that do not accept AI content,
therefore Shutterstock,Istock,Alamy,Envato,Depositphotos and others they do not accept AI contents from contributors.

It seems clear as day to me that the future of microstock lies in one agency:Adobe.

Istock,Alamy and Envato they launched their AI a month ago,and they will soon go the way of Shutterstock towards decline(for us) and I don't see a future for contributors in these agencies,because these agencies are not interested in making contributors earn with AI.

so unfortunately I think there is only one basket left here!

f8 · « **Reply #16 on:** October 12, 2023, 16:58 »

There is no relationship with any agency. All agencies provide a platform to distribute your content and in exchange the platform gives you a small royalty and it's always on their terms. All agencies have a unilateral contract. We are all expendable. Those are the facts.

Asthebelltolls · « **Reply #17 on:** October 12, 2023, 17:36 »

Quote from: f8 on October 12, 2023, 16:58

There is no relationship with any agency. All agencies provide a platform to distribute your content and in exchange the platform gives you a small royalty and it's always on their terms. All agencies have a unilateral contract. We are all expendable. Those are the facts.

And the only way we can enjoy fair compensation for our work is to unionize. Period. Otherwise, online agencies will always be in control. Either you accept their terms and continue providing them with your images or you don't. That's the world we currently live in. We set-up our own agency and agree to providing OUR agency with images, clips and illustrations and no one else.

task150 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 13, 2023, 01:18 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on October 12, 2023, 05:31

Sad to hear this, but our relationship with Adobe (or any other agency) was never a partnership to begin with. Not even an employee (who has benefits and employment laws to protect him). It's a completely one-sided agreement to deliver content in return for royalties, and contributors have to either suck up any policy change or decision from HQ, or leave the agency. To them, you're just an expendable asset, no matter how good your content or sales are.

All I can say is: never put your eggs in one basket.

You're correct; thank you for the support! I've inquired with Adobe multiple times about the possibility of creating a separate account for specific types of work, among other things. Despite their assurances that it's not necessary, it turns out that it actually is.

task150 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 13, 2023, 01:20 »

Quote from: Lukeruk on October 12, 2023, 12:33

I am sad to hear this. For 14 years and 115,000 uploads, there is a really negligible number of mistakes, especially if there was no intention to make them. Making mistakes is in human nature; we make them on a daily basis, and if there is no bad intention, Adobe should reconsider the case.
I hope your account will be unblocked soon.

Thank you! I'm certainly hopeful!

task150 · « **Reply #20 on:** October 13, 2023, 01:24 »

Quote from: Wilm on October 12, 2023, 12:50

Quote from: task150 on October 10, 2023, 14:40
The first regarded wood textures, which by nature are quite similar.

Recently I needed wood textures for 3D visualizations. These included spruce, pine, larch, meranti and oak (and more).

I have not found any usable textures at AS. There were several reasons for this in combination:
- The algorithm did not show useful results.
- I did not need any planked textures.
- The textures could not contain knotholes.
- The scale did not fit for me.
- For many textures it was not obvious if it was really the exact wood species. Or if there was keyword spamming on the files.

I then bought a texture bundle from a specialty vendor. However, these were not usable because the textures only contained numbers - it was not obvious behind which number, for example, pine or spruce was hidden. I got my money back.

The fact is that pine, spruce and larch in particular have a very similar grain. It is a huge mistake for a stock agency to reject such textures, which are difficult to distinguish, because of similarity.
This has nothing to do with spamming!

I am very sorry for you and I hope that the problem will be solved as soon as possible.

Yes, you are absolutely right! It happens that you might need certain types of textures or slightly different ones, like without knots for example. And so on; i.e., there can be a lot of variations of what is needed. But at the same time, all the textures of a certain material will be similar in one way or another.

f8 · « **Reply #21 on:** October 13, 2023, 09:11 »

Quote from: Asthebelltolls on October 12, 2023, 17:36

Quote from: f8 on October 12, 2023, 16:58
There is no relationship with any agency. All agencies provide a platform to distribute your content and in exchange the platform gives you a small royalty and it's always on their terms. All agencies have a unilateral contract. We are all expendable. Those are the facts.
And the only way we can enjoy fair compensation for our work is to unionize. Period. Otherwise, online agencies will always be in control. Either you accept their terms and continue providing them with your images or you don't. That's the world we currently live in. We set-up our own agency and agree to providing OUR agency with images, clips and illustrations and no one else.

You lost me at "unionize" and "set-up our own agency". That said, why don't YOU set up an platform that provides better royalty rates and terms?

Unfortunately the stock photo industry has gone from being a once viable and lucrative career to being a losing game career wise. I know this because I have seen the pendulum swing both ways. To think any agency is going to improve the situation you are fooling yourself.

Sadly we are all at the mercy of corporate greed.

Stock4Me · « **Reply #22 on:** October 13, 2023, 09:23 »

Quote from: Asthebelltolls on October 12, 2023, 17:36

Quote from: f8 on October 12, 2023, 16:58
There is no relationship with any agency. All agencies provide a platform to distribute your content and in exchange the platform gives you a small royalty and it's always on their terms. All agencies have a unilateral contract. We are all expendable. Those are the facts.
And the only way we can enjoy fair compensation for our work is to unionize. Period. Otherwise, online agencies will always be in control. Either you accept their terms and continue providing them with your images or you don't. That's the world we currently live in. We set-up our own agency and agree to providing OUR agency with images, clips and illustrations and no one else.

You do that, I'll join and be exclusive. Tell me when you have the financing and the system.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #23 on:** October 13, 2023, 11:07 »

Quote from: f8 on October 13, 2023, 09:11

Quote from: Asthebelltolls on October 12, 2023, 17:36
Quote from: f8 on October 12, 2023, 16:58
There is no relationship with any agency. All agencies provide a platform to distribute your content and in exchange the platform gives you a small royalty and it's always on their terms. All agencies have a unilateral contract. We are all expendable. Those are the facts.
And the only way we can enjoy fair compensation for our work is to unionize. Period. Otherwise, online agencies will always be in control. Either you accept their terms and continue providing them with your images or you don't. That's the world we currently live in. We set-up our own agency and agree to providing OUR agency with images, clips and illustrations and no one else.

You lost me at "unionize" and "set-up our own agency". That said, why don't YOU set up an platform that provides better royalty rates and terms?

Unfortunately the stock photo industry has gone from being a once viable and lucrative career to being a losing game career wise. I know this because I have seen the pendulum swing both ways. To think any agency is going to improve the situation you are fooling yourself.

Sadly we are all at the mercy of corporate greed.

Yes we are.

Quote from: lisafx on June 02, 2010, 18:17

As much as I would like to see conditions for microstockers improved, I don't know that having an entire forum dedicated to it would have much point.

Periodically some "hero" comes along who is going to save us all from our drudgery. They start some grandiose thread and get everyone stirred up. But inevitably it always devolves into the same old gripes and circular arguments, followed by the departure of whoever stirred the pot in the first place.

Bottom line is as long as supply continues to outstrip demand by such a wide margin we don't have a lot of leverage... I wish it was different.

A trade organization or union has been discussed over and over, but most are not interested, and of those of us who would support the idea, nobody has the time or know-how to step up and take charge.

June 02, 2010 and many times since.

My main point has been, in order to have a Union, you have to have power and something to hold over the agencies. (LEVERAGE - see above) We don't have that.

In order to have a UNION you would need to be organized and agree how to proceed, there would be dues and officers and... like herding cats, I'd like to see someone get us all to agree or even have a majority that agrees on how things should be done.

I will say the way to create this hypothetical exclusive agency that is better for contributors and would require people to be exclusive to join, would be buy an existing agency. For anyone interested in some history GL stock, which came from Graphic Leftovers, was on the market for $5,000 at auction and received no bids. That would have been a steal? Or maybe not? The owner said he was making around $200 a month and didn't have time to devote more to the agency.

Quote from: Asthebelltolls on October 12, 2023, 17:36

And the only way we can enjoy fair compensation for our work is to unionize. Period. Otherwise, online agencies will always be in control. Either you accept their terms and continue providing them with your images or you don't. That's the world we currently live in. We set-up our own agency and agree to providing OUR agency with images, clips and illustrations and no one else.

There's the answer. Buy an existing agency. A great shortcut to the future. Then set it to exclusive only, and see how many artists would agree to that for, lets say 50% on every sale? Is 50% fair enough? Anyone here thing that's a good number or what would it take to ask people to be exclusive to a smaller market agency.

For an idea? How much do you make on Dreamstime? What would that be if you were exclusive and had no other source of income for RF images? Maybe someone wants to buy Yay or Mostphotos or 123RF?

Asthebelltolls · « **Reply #24 on:** October 13, 2023, 16:55 »

This is a good discussion because there aren't any contributors
in the discussion that are saying forming a union is impossible
but we all acknowledge that it would be difficult. It's a positive discussion that draws the attention of the agencies because it confirms that we're fed-up with the way we're being treated and we're collectively looking at ways of changing the playing field.
Buying a current agency already set-up and online is an excellent starting point, IMO. A minor agency that's raising a small amount of money through sales but capitol nonetheless to keep OUR agency running while the portfolio grows and fewer and fewer contributors deal with the current online agencies.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 14 years, 115,000 images, 3rd mistake - Blocked (Read 7287 times)

task150

cosus

cobalt

Injustice for all

yuriy

Artist

blvdone

task150

task150

Noedelhap

DiscreetDuck

gnirtS

yuriy

Lukeruk

Wilm

Injustice for all

f8

Asthebelltolls

task150

task150

task150

f8

Stock4Me

Uncle Pete

Asthebelltolls

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors