MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: An example of why subscription sites are bad for contributors  (Read 3145 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RT


« on: November 25, 2010, 05:20 »
0
Just read this on Fast media magazine:

http://www.fastmediamagazine.com/blog/2010/11/24/alert-your-highres-access-accounts-were-being-traded/

For some it's not good enough that they can get our work for nearly next to nothing but they feel the need to let others use our work without paying for it.


« Reply #1 on: November 25, 2010, 05:23 »
0
That is absolutely bizarre: http://seraphicdesign.livejournal.com/

I mean, how can these sites not notice this going on?

BTW, another reason "download 750 images a month" is ridiculous.

RT


« Reply #2 on: November 25, 2010, 05:30 »
0
Do the sites check or even care?

molka

    This user is banned.
« Reply #3 on: November 25, 2010, 07:13 »
0
Do the sites check or even care?

why would they? the subscriptions expire the same whoever is clicking. the only reason they might be alerted is that they were always banking on buyers using a lot less than the full capacity of the sub, but you can't tell that to the people can you? especially the contributors. for ppl like ss contributors, this might even be good, more dl's.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
3676 Views
Last post September 26, 2006, 14:55
by Istock News
Hey Video Contributors!

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
2327 Views
Last post April 16, 2007, 16:30
by Istock News
2 Replies
2466 Views
Last post August 02, 2014, 11:51
by etudiante_rapide
4 Replies
13556 Views
Last post December 17, 2014, 09:13
by Niakris
1 Replies
3912 Views
Last post November 06, 2015, 15:10
by Hongover

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors