pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Getty Images makes 35 million images free in fight against copyright infringemen  (Read 197295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #300 on: March 06, 2014, 20:01 »
0
I enquired about the right click problem in Getty's own forums and received a reply that right click will shortly be disabled.


« Reply #301 on: March 06, 2014, 20:12 »
+9
The artist need to make hard decisions now. Be really honest with themselves how they want to work in the next few years.

Once the files are out there and spread all over it is too late.

Getty made a unilateral decision to change their business model and didn't ask the copyright owners. All the articles talk about how they make THEIR content available for free.

No respect at all.

They might have 200k people signed up over all their agencies, but it is the vetta artists and getty house people that matter.

If Carlyle thinks getty can be sold for 20 billion dollars like whatsapp by monetising the content, do they really believe the content owners don't understand the value of their  own files?

OM

« Reply #302 on: March 06, 2014, 20:16 »
+3

« Reply #303 on: March 06, 2014, 20:19 »
+10
The suits making the decisions will happily cash out when Getty is sold and use what they done here on their resume. I watched private equity firms purchase every company I have worked for. It always starts with the promise of business as usual. Then benefits start to slim. Then staff. Then when the company is lean enough they sell. The remaining employees will have to fend for themselves as they have to conform to new ownership. The smart ones will jump ship. The others will hang in there until they eventually get the boot. We don't come into the equation anymore. We don't come into play any more. We were dismissed long ago. A lot of the moves with Getty and IStock could not be more clear.

OM

« Reply #304 on: March 06, 2014, 20:20 »
+7
I enquired about the right click problem in Getty's own forums and received a reply that right click will shortly be disabled.

Don't care. Got MWSnap. Many other screen captures available. Disabled right click is like trying to ban Pirate Bay and equally effective.

« Reply #305 on: March 06, 2014, 20:22 »
+19
Agreed the other sites should sue for anti-competitive practices. They've got the lawyers.  They know the ins and outs.  The Getty 'contract' can be found, and I doubt 'giving away 35 million images' is included.

« Reply #306 on: March 06, 2014, 20:27 »
+4
Boy, this has really taken the heat off the new subs program at IS hasn't it?

So, when was this announced - today?  I thought they had a 30 day notice, but the scheme is already working.  I seem to remember something about 30 days before they let me leave Istock a year ago.  So even if you quit today you still supply free content for 30 days?

Does the free content fall of the blog when you remove it from Getty?

« Reply #307 on: March 06, 2014, 20:29 »
+14
I hate this deal.  A good portion of my port is travel and travel editorial related.  Much of my material is subject matter they decided should be given away for free.  Deactivating my port maybe a sound business decision.  Certainly something I'm thinking over. 

« Reply #308 on: March 06, 2014, 20:47 »
+6
Hobostocker

Your avatar is out of date.

Will Work For Beer Free

!!! +

I think that prices of all other sizes should change also:

Blog - Free
Medium - 3 Free
Large - 15 Free
Vectors - 25 Free
Extended License - 75 Free

« Reply #309 on: March 06, 2014, 20:49 »
+5
I enquired about the right click problem in Getty's own forums and received a reply that right click will shortly be disabled.

That's largely pointless. Anyone with more than two seconds experience in putting together web pages (i.e. bloggers) will likely know how to find the image by looking at the browser source.

BD

« Reply #310 on: March 06, 2014, 21:16 »
+9
Shutterstock responds:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/shutterstock-ceo-on-deals-getty-house-of-cards-cyB75o52SvOE2B8lFo4GlQ.html

Among some other things, after being asked about Getty near the end he says:
"Committed to making sure...our contributors continue to get paid."  :)
« Last Edit: March 06, 2014, 21:21 by BD »

« Reply #311 on: March 06, 2014, 22:35 »
+25
.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2014, 20:20 by onepointfour »

« Reply #312 on: March 06, 2014, 23:33 »
+9
So if I'm reading it correctly, iStock excluded the Vetta images from the new subs program... so they could be given away for free over at GettyImages.  That follows the typical logic we see over there.

What happens to the embedded image when a contributor leaves Getty and the image is disabled?  Does the blogger end up with a big blank panel or will Getty have something else the drop in there, perhaps an ad for Getty? (or maybe they found a new use for the glitch monster - wonder if he will show up on blogs across the web when their site goes down)

« Reply #313 on: March 07, 2014, 00:32 »
-1
Shutterstock responds:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/shutterstock-ceo-on-deals-getty-house-of-cards-cyB75o52SvOE2B8lFo4GlQ.html

Among some other things, after being asked about Getty near the end he says:
"Committed to making sure...our contributors continue to get paid."  :)


He sidestepped the Getty Free Image topic like a seasoned politician.

marthamarks

« Reply #314 on: March 07, 2014, 00:40 »
+10
This is my best week ever for SODs there...even today, with all those free images available from Getty.  ;)

Funny coincidence: today on SS I had my 2nd best day ever with a SOD for $92 plus 7 other sales that brought my daily total to over $100. Only once before, in May of 2013, did I have a better day (with 8 sweet ELs totaling $224).

That may not sound like a lot to many of you, but for a niche (wildlife) shooter like me it's pretty good. If this is what happens when the morons at Getty act like greedy jerks, I'll take it!

« Reply #315 on: March 07, 2014, 01:17 »
+2
Shutterstock responds:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/shutterstock-ceo-on-deals-getty-house-of-cards-cyB75o52SvOE2B8lFo4GlQ.html

Among some other things, after being asked about Getty near the end he says:
"Committed to making sure...our contributors continue to get paid."  :)


He sidestepped the Getty Free Image topic like a seasoned politician.


I noticed that :)

Like so many US TV interviewers, there's no follow up or push back to try and get the guest to answer the question, which is a bit disappointing. It would be so nice to see someone take a swing at Getty over this scheme, but I can see why it's probably wiser for Shutterstock's CEO not to do that.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #316 on: March 07, 2014, 02:15 »
-1
That's largely pointless. Anyone with more than two seconds experience in putting together web pages (i.e. bloggers) will likely know how to find the image by looking at the browser source.

or even better you can use logging tools like WireShark.

however from what i've seen so far the JPG file names are bogus and the image is retrieved with a crypted hex string in the URL.

i don't think it will be hard to make for instance a Wordpress plugin that grabs the embed code and sticks the JPEG URL inside an article without the need for embedding and all .. but technically this is "hotlinking" so probably against Getty's TOS.

as much as they rant about hackers and freeloaders i've never heard of a Getty Downloader or other similar desktop apps to batch download thumbnails with auto-removal of watermarks etc .. same for the other stock agencies and actually this is not technically hard considering Getty has also APIs on their site.

i remember years ago a WP plugins doing something similar for Flickr images but i think it's been discontinued and never had much success, the reasons seems to be that bloggers don't have time and patience to search for the right image, they just spend 30 seconds on google images and steal what they can find in the first 2-3 pages.

now that many are "microblogging" using tablets and smartphones it must be even more awkward to do the whole mess on a tiny touchscreen.



Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #317 on: March 07, 2014, 02:29 »
-12
If Carlyle thinks getty can be sold for 20 billion dollars like whatsapp by monetising the content, do they really believe the content owners don't understand the value of their  own files?

As far as we're concerned we should just be happy that Getty is trying new ways to further monetize our images, what's good for Getty is ultimately good also for photographers because it means more sales.

There's never been such a huge demand for quality images as today but for whatever reason it's still very cumbersome to monetize this ocean of photos and the obvious result is users totally disregard copyright and embrace piracy.

However this getty experiment turns out it's finally a good move in the right direction.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #318 on: March 07, 2014, 02:34 »
-6
I hate this deal.  A good portion of my port is travel and travel editorial related.  Much of my material is subject matter they decided should be given away for free.  Deactivating my port maybe a sound business decision.  Certainly something I'm thinking over.

I see it differently : once your embedded images are clicked 100 or 200 times you could make one sale, the average conversion-rate on e-commerce sites is 0.5% to 1%, photos are a bit harder to sell so maybe you can expect 0.1%

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #319 on: March 07, 2014, 02:39 »
-9
!!! +

I think that prices of all other sizes should change also:

Blog - Free
Medium - 3 Free
Large - 15 Free
Vectors - 25 Free
Extended License - 75 Free

You guys don't get it.

Flooding blogs with embedded low res images with the photographer's name anche the image linking to Getty is free advertising which will ultimately lead to more SALES.

Serious buyers will never use embedded getty images with links and all, it would be totally unprofessional and would make them look cheap.

Only rock bottom bloggers will embed so this new thing is not threatening our biz in any way, it will just monetize a niche that at the moment has been at the mercy of leechers and pirates since forever.


Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #320 on: March 07, 2014, 02:41 »
+1
It would be so nice to see someone take a swing at Getty over this scheme, but I can see why it's probably wiser for Shutterstock's CEO not to do that.

SS is not scared because there's nothing to be scared from low res embedded images, designers will still need to buy full size images and so most of the other traditional clients, only random bloggers will eventually embed free images and these guys were certainly using stolen images before so they should not even considered "lost sales" or whatever.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #321 on: March 07, 2014, 02:42 »
-3
You think converting 1 in a 1000 clicks is the worst scenario?

Whatever you're on, I'd like some of that, please.

Yes, it means 0.1% conversion rate and it's a realistic number considering how hard is to sell images online.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #322 on: March 07, 2014, 02:44 »
-1
This whole initiative is about the existing Hedge Fund bailing out looking for a new buyer, someone with very deep pockets. Huge, huge gamble for them.

Well, they better do it now before the web 3.0 bubble implodes.

New buyers ? what about Adobe, Apple, Google, just to name a few.
or even Microsoft .. so they would become the stock kings merging getty and corbis ?




Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #323 on: March 07, 2014, 02:46 »
+2
Hobostocker

Your avatar is out of date.

Will Work For Beer Free

Look, there's life outside stock.
For instance monday i'll shoot an outdoor assignment and therefore talk with customers face to face and get the money straight in my hands, no loopholes or middlemen or stock agencies involved.

I will certainly work just for fun, but never for free.


Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #324 on: March 07, 2014, 02:51 »
0
Wrong, the correct answer is "Getty is cheaper than microstock"

Getty is in the business of selling digital images and nobody can deny it's gettying tougher and tougher in a world where anyone is uploading tons of free images with their phones and DSLRs every day.

The demand is booming but so is the supply.

What are we supposed to do ? It's 2014, the 90's are gone !

Besides, buyers using cheap images will ultimately produce cheap products so there's always a price to pay even if the images are cheap or free.

Quality means high prices and exclusivity, RF and low-res cr-ap are just dime a dozen nowadays.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
13168 Views
Last post January 14, 2010, 14:10
by Jonathan Ross
7 Replies
5331 Views
Last post August 14, 2013, 17:34
by KB
2 Replies
3809 Views
Last post March 05, 2014, 21:08
by KarenH
107 Replies
49343 Views
Last post June 15, 2018, 09:02
by YadaYadaYada
1 Replies
1799 Views
Last post May 19, 2022, 21:25
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors