MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: ShadySue on February 09, 2018, 09:43
-
https://photoarchivenews.com/news/getty-images-partnera-goolge-multi-year-global-licensing-partnership (https://photoarchivenews.com/news/getty-images-partnera-goolge-multi-year-global-licensing-partnership)
Just posting for info.
I can't get my head round any possible implications; we clearly need to know more.
-
Yes but not sure we ever will........or not an unspun version. Being a cynic I reckon IS got a nice few dollars not to kick up too much fuss but doubt in means $$ for us plebs.
-
It's a discussion about changing Google Image Search? But knowing Getty, there must be more to it than just 'protecting' contributor's images. They'll probably announce some new deal with Google that's gonna turn out bad for us.
-
I thought at first that Getty had come into an agreement with Google to somehow licence images found under Google Image Search, which is why I posted in the general stock forum instead of iStock or Getty; but on re-reading, I think the agreement is that Google will use Getty images under licence for "many of our products and services".
Oh, and there's an announcement in the News forum at iS. From that take, it doesn't look bad/worrying at all.
https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/09/getty-images-and-google-declare-a-truce-with-new-image-licensing-partnership (https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/09/getty-images-and-google-declare-a-truce-with-new-image-licensing-partnership)
-
I almost posted this under iStock but checked first. While the most of the message looks like a settlement and win for Getty, in their view, or how we should be happy, no click image, larger protected message, what about this?
"In addition, we're announcing that Getty Images and Google have embarked on a global strategic partnership that will see deeper integration of Getty Images’ world class imagery across Google’s suite of products and services. We will work closely with Google to improve attribution of our contributors' work and grow the ecosystem."
Getty partners with Google Images, that sounds scary as hell.
-
I guess the really big unknown is how will google change their image search to benefit getty or push down non-getty.
Also I wonder if getty got some big $ as part of this, and the actual image usages will be for less (and that is what will get split in the usual getty unequal way).
-
So, did anything change on Google Images? There were a lot of complaints from Stock Art sites when they went to their current non-click through look.
-
Sounds to me more like "Google image searches will return more Getty images results than anything else".
Doesn't sound like Google is going to just be a Getty customer.
-
Also I wonder if getty got some big $ as part of this, and the actual image usages will be for less (and that is what will get split in the usual getty unequal way).
Presumably, they'll have 'premium access' with the contributors having no 'access' to the 'premium'. :(
-
It's the "global strategic partnership" part that worries me.
When an agency does not give complete details about a change it usually means we're screwed.
-
I will believe there is a profitable deal when money arrives in my account.
Until then, I will remain sceptical.
Getty has given us all kind of „exciting“ announcements over the years and usually the result was that we lose money.
-
It's the "global strategic partnership" part that worries me.
When an agency does not give complete details about a change it usually means we're screwed.
That's what I thought too. Details are neglected intentionally.
And now that we don't have click through, which was the complaint, the new complaint is that we don't have click through. ::)
-
Sounds to me more like "Google image searches will return more Getty images results than anything else".
Doesn't sound like Google is going to just be a Getty customer.
Yeah, that was my interpretation as well.
-
It's the "global strategic partnership" part that worries me.
Similarly When an agency does give complete details about a change it usually means we're screwed :o
-
I will believe there is a profitable deal when money arrives in my account.
Until then, I will remain sceptical.
Getty has given us all kind of „exciting“ announcements over the years and usually the result was that we lose money.
I don't see them making any claims that this will benefit us, the contributors, other than a bit of IP protection.
-
I will believe there is a profitable deal when money arrives in my account.
Until then, I will remain sceptical.
Getty has given us all kind of „exciting“ announcements over the years and usually the result was that we lose money.
I don't see them making any claims that this will benefit us, the contributors, other than a bit of IP protection.
Just wait, the global licensing partnership is more than protecting rights. You don't need a partnership to drop a lawsuit or disagreement. Somethings going on, we just don't know what yet. Considering past history with Getty, it's not likely to benefit us in any way, only Getty.
-
As usual this is an "exciting" deal with very little detail on why anyone should be excited. So if Google uses a Getty image in one of their products how does this benefit contributors? What products? How much is the sale amount and how much does the contributor get?
If Google wanted to help both buyers and artists they should add a search checkbox/filter that allows a buyer to select an image that is for sale so buyers dont need to wade through a bazzilion non-licensable images.
-
You can bet your house, if there was going to be more money for photographers in this deal they would have mentioned that specifically and given us examples of how much more we can expect.
If they don´t mention money...there will be none...and since they talk about "better attribution" this sounds like there might be more ways for customers to use our images for free...just with a getty logo in it and our name somewhere in very small print.
Getty already has a free "embedding" program, my guess we will see that drastically expanded.
"Exciting news" without a crystal clear announcement of money....in the stock industry is usually bad news for photographers.
-
Actually I think its one time they haven't used the term "Exciting" which is worrying :o
-
Actually I think its one time they haven't used the term "Exciting" which is worrying :o
No need for worry my friend. Read the last paragraph.
https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/09/getty-images-and-google-declare-a-truce-with-new-image-licensing-partnership/
-
Actually I think its one time they haven't used the term "Exciting" which is worrying :o
No need for worry my friend. Read the last paragraph.
https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/09/getty-images-and-google-declare-a-truce-with-new-image-licensing-partnership/
They are saying they're excited, not that it's 'exciting' for us. Have to say the announcement on their forum is very subdued.
-
Actually I think its one time they haven't used the term "Exciting" which is worrying :o
No need for worry my friend. Read the last paragraph.
https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/09/getty-images-and-google-declare-a-truce-with-new-image-licensing-partnership/
They are saying they're excited, not that it's 'exciting' for us. Have to say the announcement on their forum is very subdued.
Excite, exciting, excitement, excited, whatever.
-
I like "Growing the Ecosystem" are they going to plant trees from the profit?
-
I like "Growing the Ecosystem" are they going to plant trees from the profit?
That's pretty big news. Getty have been around for a long time so.
-
I like "Growing the Ecosystem" are they going to plant trees from the profit?
I think it was that particular piece of egrecious, fatuous corporate gobbledegook which make me post the OP!
-
I like "Growing the Ecosystem" are they going to plant trees from the profit?
I think it was that particular piece of egrecious, fatuous corporate gobbledegook which make me post the OP!
Luckily I'm out of the world of management/corporate speak now! SS are full of it now probably because their sales are flattening out and shareholders need to be kept confused.
-
I like "Growing the Ecosystem" are they going to plant trees from the profit?
I think it was that particular piece of egrecious, fatuous corporate gobbledegook which make me post the OP!
Luckily I'm out of the world of management/corporate speak now! SS are full of it now probably because their sales are flattening out and shareholders need to be kept confused.
Who? This was about Getty wasn't it? Getty who owns IS and has more debt than income, who ripped the heart out of IS for shareholder and H&F investment profits, then dumped us all on the ground. Cut commission, changed RC, pulled editorial, and bled the company dry. Now they have the dry carcas with some new ESP system that pays as low as 2 cents. Did you really mean SS?
-
Yep when I read the last Transcript of Oringers quarterly Q and A session it was completely incomprehensible to me...when they were growing quite nicely I could understand it. Yes SS are doing reasonably well but I don't think they will see the growth stockholders are betting on. IS have always talked rubbish;-)
-
Now they have the dry carcas with some new ESP system that pays as low as 2 cents. Did you really mean SS?
iStock was paying 2c commissions long before ESP was introduced, which is just an upload platform. This fact was well hidden in the convoluted ways of presenting sales information, but it was possible to find with enough determination. If nothing else, Getty is a lot more transparent now about contributors' sales.
-
Now they have the dry carcas with some new ESP system that pays as low as 2 cents. Did you really mean SS?
iStock was paying 2c commissions long before ESP was introduced, which is just an upload platform. This fact was well hidden in the convoluted ways of presenting sales information, but it was possible to find with enough determination. If nothing else, Getty is a lot more transparent now about contributors' sales.
The two cent bottom cap was a game changer, it means they can radically discount yearly subscription packages and still make money. Shutterstock followed suit with smaller subs packages, unless other agencies go the same way and put us on a percentage for subs there is no way they can compete.
-
The two cent bottom cap was a game changer, it means they can radically discount yearly subscription packages and still make money.
I am not so sure, that remains to be seen. You would expect aspirin should cost one cent per kilo by now but it doesn't.
-
Microstock is dead! and its almost uncanny as I said that some buyer bought 11 single sales for a total of $303.74. After this I will complain all the time, it PAYS well!
-
Unless I'm missing something, it looks like any images on Getty will have more reach across the internet through google. I'm struggling to come up with anything negative about this. Is it just that anything and everything posted on this forum about Getty/iStock gets a couple pages of negative comments assuming they're screwing contributors over.
-
Yes!
-
Unless I'm missing something, it looks like any images on Getty will have more reach across the internet through google. I'm struggling to come up with anything negative about this. Is it just that anything and everything posted on this forum about Getty/iStock gets a couple pages of negative comments assuming they're screwing contributors over.
Because this has been our accumulated practical experience. I remember starting out in stock and everyone of the old timers warned us about Getty. I thought they must be bitter about something or are exaggerating.
Here I am now, 14 years later, wondering after every "exciting" announcement how bad it will be this time...
The only one responsible for a companies reputation is the company itself.
You don´t hear things like these about Shutterstock or Alamy and even Fotolia has made a real turnaround and has worked hard to have a reliable, artist friendly reputation.
The internet doesn´t forget, any drama you create, any artist that gets deleted - it will remain online forever.
And maybe they like the "hard nosed/cold" reputation, who knows?
I wish my friends who are working there well, but I have given up trying to understand why Getty runs it´s companies reputation the way they do.