Agency Based Discussion > General - Top Sites

Fairness Hypocrisy in Getty / iStock Enhanced MODEL RELEASES

(1/2) > >>

zorba:
So, now we are going to be forced to use these new Enhanced model releases. That's it, I have no problem with that, I am this side of the lens.

But it's funny the answer to "What if models don't want to sign an enhanced model release?" that I read as "if they don't sign this, you can't work with them, stop."

This is great, because GDPR and every other kind of data protection laws are created about freedom and people's control concepts. But their freedom is take it or leave it kind  ;D

I've clearly read that they state "we will continue to accept non-enhanced model releases for the time being" but I have plenty of OLD shooting model releases and I hope that, in regards to the old releases, they don't want to consider this stuff retroactive in the future.

Uncle Pete:


Welcome to iStock terms.

everest:
Gettyimages acts similar to the mafia. Scare tactics, abuse, dishonesty, bullying, but hey ....they ask for a honourable code to their contributor. What a joke that agency is.

ShadySue:
I'm not sure that fair and Getty belong in the same sentence any more than Truth and either Trump or Boris.

Uncle Pete:

--- Quote from: ShadySue on February 03, 2022, 07:32 ---I'm not sure that fair and Getty belong in the same sentence any more than Truth and either Trump or Boris.

--- End quote ---

Wait but you just used all five in the same sentence?  ;D

iStock in the early years, did a wonderful job of marketing to artists. Lipses, (whatever those meeting were called?) how much we care about you, all the colorful frosting slathered on a fake cardboard cake.

Then once things got strong and they had enough images, they started the rug pull. Switching levels, putting work into cheaper collections, creating sites like Thinkstock from all the smaller agencies they owned and included our work.

But back to the model releases, where agencies have gone from bad to worse. Remember IS rejecting other agency releases for the location? I'll never know why we need a release for a picture of oneself. Am I going to sue myself for use, so I need someone else to say I took my own photo?  :o

Maybe this just comes down to eliminating an unnecessary requirement, as the artist is responsible for the release and the witness has no connection or meaningful part of the document?

No I don't think we'll see this suddenly change for everywhere. We have laws and lawyers involved. Nothing will change fast, if at all.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page