pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Has Alexandre Rotenberg sold his soul to the devil of free stock again?  (Read 17549 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #25 on: April 20, 2023, 13:04 »
0
I currently earn nothing from Shutterstock as they closed my account when I protested their 2020 royalty cuts, but the same was true for them before I became an outcast.
Were you banned just because you wrote to them that you are against lowering payments?

I had been posting a lot on twitter about the reduction in royalty rates and they closed my account twice. The first time ostensibly because I'd changed my profile picture in violation of their rules (which I hadn't - my profile picture was the same boring headshot it had been for ages) and the second time because of my public comments:

"We disabled your account in consideration of your public comments regarding Shutterstock. While we respect your opinion, it may not be a good fit for Shutterstock to represent your content. In section 4 of the TOS, Shutterstock reserves the right to terminate an account in Shutterstock's discretion."

Account closed for Twitter Posts? I'll assume they also blocked you from Twitter access to their pages and removed your posts?

https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms?language=en#:~:text=The%20following%20Terms%20of%20Service%20%28%22TOS%22%29%20is%20a,carefully%20and%20be%20sure%20you%20understand%20it%20fully.

Nothing about Shutterstock's Discretion in section 4.


« Reply #26 on: April 20, 2023, 13:32 »
0
Account closed for Twitter Posts? I'll assume they also blocked you from Twitter access to their pages and removed your posts?

https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms?language=en#:~:text=The%20following%20Terms%20of%20Service%20%28%22TOS%22%29%20is%20a,carefully%20and%20be%20sure%20you%20understand%20it%20fully.

Nothing about Shutterstock's Discretion in section 4.

See the last words in 4 c:

"Shutterstock has the right to refuse to establish an account or to close any existing account, for fraud, intellectual property infringement, violation of a third party's rights including those of privacy or publicity, artificially inflating downloads, submission of material that is obscene in nature, violent or that might be construed as defamatory, failure to comply with Shutterstock's guidelines as may be amended from time to time, for any breach of the terms of this or any other agreement that you have with shutterstock, or for convenience."

So they reserve the right to close accounts whenever they find it inconvenient to keep the account open.

« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2023, 13:55 »
+5
...Account closed for Twitter Posts? I'll assume they also blocked you from Twitter access to their pages and removed your posts?...

They had blocked me from their contributor and main accounts on Twitter, but you can see and read (though not respond) if you are not logged in (in an incognito window). Same with LinkedIn.

They couldn't remove my posts because they weren't made as replies to their posts (after they blocked me) but the hashtags made sure they were found and lots of unhappy contributors were amplifying the noise in the middle of 2020 when this all blew up.

Stuff like this:

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1296943168185700352

« Reply #28 on: April 20, 2023, 18:38 »
+1
I think your adventure through these websites can be of some entertainment for you brasilnuts. Right? ;-)

Although sites like Pexels gives "unlimited access to over 3 million free, high-resolution photos and videos". This is very useful for some Research companies that i have in mind... and i do know that  companies go to this sites first before buying anything in others.

Good luck for your experimentation! (Boa Sorte!)

Maybe i learn "something" unexpected but you got me thinking in an little Machiavellian way: Perhaps doing a website like Pexels and sell trained models for machine learning directly to companies. They could easily donate 1000 dollars for 25K sale work. :)

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #29 on: April 21, 2023, 05:57 »
+4
DCMA updates

Adobe Stock:

Spotted two thieves at AS who were trying to re-sell the red lighthouse. Their legal team acted quickly and took down the images but left their accounts intact. Here's one of them:

https://stock.adobe.com/ca/contributor/211377677/abdul?load_type=author&prev_url=detail

SS:

No update. Very slow to act and they will also most likely just remove the lighthouse images and keep the thieving account active.

----

Overall, super disappointing if they're not shutting down whole accounts. One theft/infringement should be enough to constitute a material breach of the contributor agreement. I'll try to reach out to AS on Twitter about this...can't on SS as they blocked me on there.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2023, 06:02 by Brasilnut »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #30 on: April 21, 2023, 11:00 »
0
Account closed for Twitter Posts? I'll assume they also blocked you from Twitter access to their pages and removed your posts?

https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms?language=en#:~:text=The%20following%20Terms%20of%20Service%20%28%22TOS%22%29%20is%20a,carefully%20and%20be%20sure%20you%20understand%20it%20fully.

Nothing about Shutterstock's Discretion in section 4.

See the last words in 4 c:

"Shutterstock has the right to refuse to establish an account or to close any existing account, for fraud, intellectual property infringement, violation of a third party's rights including those of privacy or publicity, artificially inflating downloads, submission of material that is obscene in nature, violent or that might be construed as defamatory, failure to comply with Shutterstock's guidelines as may be amended from time to time, for any breach of the terms of this or any other agreement that you have with shutterstock, or for convenience."

So they reserve the right to close accounts whenever they find it inconvenient to keep the account open.

Good points. I was looking for the specific words that SS used, but you are correct. Shutterstock's Discretion is covered as, they can do anything they want, if they want.

« Reply #31 on: April 22, 2023, 05:32 »
0
Overall, super disappointing if they're not shutting down whole accounts. One theft/infringement should be enough to constitute a material breach of the contributor agreement. I'll try to reach out to AS on Twitter about this...can't on SS as they blocked me on there.

Yeah, probably all images are stolen. I was too lazy to search for all images, just found bicycle on Pixabay: https://pixabay.com/vectors/bike-bicycle-motorcycle-cycling-7342379/
and butterfly: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/moth-butterfly-insect-wings-7725211/
« Last Edit: April 22, 2023, 05:44 by Lina »

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2023, 06:26 »
+2
Overall, super disappointing if they're not shutting down whole accounts. One theft/infringement should be enough to constitute a material breach of the contributor agreement. I'll try to reach out to AS on Twitter about this...can't on SS as they blocked me on there.

Yeah, probably all images are stolen. I was too lazy to search for all images, just found bicycle on Pixabay: https://pixabay.com/vectors/bike-bicycle-motorcycle-cycling-7342379/
and butterfly: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/moth-butterfly-insect-wings-7725211/

Indeed, all stolen.

So, small update is that both AS and SS have removed the stolen images from four different accounts, but have unfortunately/frustratingly left the accounts intact with the remaining images (all stolen presumably). Some of these accounts have 200+ images.

I've requested for the fraudulent accounts to be shut down on the DCMA email thread but have not received a reply. Also radio-silence on my tweet to AS. Dead end it seems and wasting my time.

@Mat Hayward: If you're reading this, could you please clarify what is AS's official policy on finding an account with stolen images, in particular whether a full account can be closed upon discovery of at least one stolen image via a DCMA complaint of a copyright holder.

« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2023, 09:21 »
+1
Overall, super disappointing if they're not shutting down whole accounts. One theft/infringement should be enough to constitute a material breach of the contributor agreement. I'll try to reach out to AS on Twitter about this...can't on SS as they blocked me on there.

Yeah, probably all images are stolen. I was too lazy to search for all images, just found bicycle on Pixabay: https://pixabay.com/vectors/bike-bicycle-motorcycle-cycling-7342379/
and butterfly: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/moth-butterfly-insect-wings-7725211/

Indeed, all stolen.

So, small update is that both AS and SS have removed the stolen images from four different accounts, but have unfortunately/frustratingly left the accounts intact with the remaining images (all stolen presumably). Some of these accounts have 200+ images.

I've requested for the fraudulent accounts to be shut down on the DCMA email thread but have not received a reply. Also radio-silence on my tweet to AS. Dead end it seems and wasting my time.

@Mat Hayward: If you're reading this, could you please clarify what is AS's official policy on finding an account with stolen images, in particular whether a full account can be closed upon discovery of at least one stolen image via a DCMA complaint of a copyright holder.

Sad indeed that they just remove the image and don't do further investigation on the account, and shut it down when it turns out that one DCMA request was only the tip of the iceberg. Uploading a stolen image is not an accident nor a coincidence.

I guess it's a matter of time and money. Stolen images sell as well as others (which is income), and removing images or shutting down accounts is resourceful (which is a cost)
So it's not "their problem" and it's up to the owner of the image to complain.


fotorob

  • Professional stock content producer
« Reply #34 on: April 25, 2023, 02:17 »
0
[redated]

« Reply #35 on: April 25, 2023, 06:41 »
+4
I currently earn nothing from Shutterstock as they closed my account when I protested their 2020 royalty cuts, but the same was true for them before I became an outcast.
Were you banned just because you wrote to them that you are against lowering payments?

They banned me as well. Together with several other people.

I learned from someone that I was considered an influencer  in the stock community.

Dont know if that really was the reason, but I turned my port back on after 2 week protest and also explicitly wrote that in public. I signed the petition like many others and of course was not happy with the changes.

But as soon as the two weeks where over and I turned my port back on, I got kicked out.

No explanation, just a 2 liner that their legal stuff allows them to do this.

I loved the Shutterstock team, the people I met over the years were just fantastic.

Even held Shutterstock  shares for quite a while.

The company seemed to have a great corporate culture, very modern, very thriving on critique.

But it looks like everyone I met is no longer there.

And since they closed their forums, it is sadly a new company under the same name.

Dont know if the new CEO is better.

When they reopen a forum to talk directly with their producers, we will know they are moving back to being innovative.

If you dont talk to the people you work with, it is difficult to grow.

Especially when Adobe does such a great job with their producer liason and also Getty here in Germany appointed Luis Alvarez as brand ambassador.

Jo Ann is an extremely well respected lady and always has well researched and intelligent comments.

I suppose she was too logical in her public writing.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2023, 12:14 by cobalt »

« Reply #36 on: April 25, 2023, 16:00 »
+1
Reviews (at least for video) can be very fast on Shutterstock. Like in a matter of minutes sometimes. But makes me think if significant numbers of contributors have reduced their uploads or stopped uploading altogether.

« Reply #37 on: April 25, 2023, 17:17 »
+2
I removed around 750 clips the last few days and put them exclusive at P5, I get bored from these 1$ dollar sales per clip

« Reply #38 on: May 17, 2023, 08:02 »
+1
The rise of free stock image agencies has brought about significant changes in the photography industry and the market for stock images. While these platforms offer benefits such as cost-free access to images, convenience, and opportunities for aspiring photographers, it is crucial to consider the broader implications and challenges they present.

The devaluation of photography and reduced earnings for professional photographers are among the primary concerns stemming from the widespread availability of free images. This shift in the market has impacted the ability of photographers to sustain their businesses, invest in equipment, and deliver innovative and high-quality work. The compromised quality, limited variety, and lack of customization options in free stock image agencies also raise concerns for designers and content creators seeking unique and authentic visuals.

The negative impact extends beyond photographers to stock image providers who have faced increased competition and declining revenues. Additionally, the potential for copyright infringements and unauthorized use of images poses legal risks for users of free stock image agencies. While user donations can provide a form of appreciation and supplementary income for photographers, they do not address the underlying issues of fair compensation and devaluation within the industry. User donations may be unevenly distributed, perpetuating inequalities and creating dependency on fluctuating financial support.

Moving forward, it is crucial for the industry to find a balance between accessibility and fair compensation for photographers. Education on copyright laws, implementing stricter guidelines, and promoting ethical practices can help protect photographers' rights and maintain the integrity of the industry. Additionally, supporting and valuing the work of professional photographers while exploring sustainable business models can contribute to a thriving and diverse photography ecosystem.

By understanding the multifaceted nature of free stock image agencies and their impact, stakeholders can navigate the challenges and work towards a more sustainable and equitable industry where both creators and users can benefit. It is important to foster an environment that values the creative work of photographers and ensures fair compensation, rather than relying solely on user donations, which may not address the underlying issues of devaluation and reduced earnings. Through collaborative efforts, we can strive for a photography industry that recognizes the importance of creativity, innovation, and fair compensation for all stakeholders involved.


Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #39 on: September 06, 2023, 07:48 »
+3

« Reply #40 on: September 06, 2023, 08:08 »
+1
Thank you for the update.

It was an interesting experiment and your article can be shared with anyone tempted to try this.

But also good to read that the sales at the micros didnt suffer.

Customers who buy stock need a legal license. downloading from free sites is not really an option for them.

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #41 on: September 06, 2023, 11:24 »
+6
Thank you for the update.

It was an interesting experiment and your article can be shared with anyone tempted to try this.

But also good to read that the sales at the micros didnt suffer.

Customers who buy stock need a legal license. downloading from free sites is not really an option for them.
Well, his sales weren't directly impacted as far as he could tell. That's not the same as sales on stock sites not being impacted by these sites in the aggregate. Taking the flag example he gave; the buyer could have thought his flag was good enough for free, and therefore didnt have to buy a different one from another contributor on one of the stock sites. This is certainly true when you zoom out all the way, i.e. if these sites werent fed at all a lot more buyers would be having to license images overall.

As far as the donations go, I am surprised anyone donates voluntarily at all. I am sure a lot of the people downloading from these places assume a lot of the work is stolen anyway, so why donate to someone who may have only pinched the photo from elsewhere? They just want the cover to be able to say they didnt know (if only to themselves). Even if the buyer believes you are the photographer, youve already made it clear your work has no value to you so why should it have more value to me? Along the same lines, I am not overly sympathetic to the theft either. Youve demonstrated your work is worthless to you so why kick up a stink when someone else can make a living out of it?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2023, 04:48 by Justanotherphotographer »


« Reply #42 on: September 06, 2023, 21:39 »
+3
I must admit Im surprised not even one person donated. Not even one?! Im not one to upload to the free sites, but seriously!

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #43 on: September 07, 2023, 06:37 »
+1
I must admit Im surprised not even one person donated. Not even one?! Im not one to upload to the free sites, but seriously!

Maybe after a million downloads I would earn my first $1 in donations!  ;D

wds

« Reply #44 on: September 07, 2023, 08:04 »
+1
Interesting but not surprising. Thanks for taking the effort to show a real world experiment!

« Reply #45 on: September 08, 2023, 03:18 »
+4
I am not surprised at all that there were no donations. People go to sites that offer free images, because they want FREE images. If they are willing to pay for images they go to other platforms. That seems like a no brainer to me.

fotorob

  • Professional stock content producer
« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2023, 03:56 »
+3
@Brasilnut:
Thanks for the update.
I think the most worrying find of your experiment was the amount of potential thieves trying to re-sell your free images.
This does directly hut your own sales at the stock agencies, as it shifts the sales to more people and away from your images.
On a small scale maybe, but nevertheless...

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #47 on: September 21, 2023, 07:03 »
+1
@Brasilnut:
Thanks for the update.
I think the most worrying find of your experiment was the amount of potential thieves trying to re-sell your free images.
This does directly hut your own sales at the stock agencies, as it shifts the sales to more people and away from your images.
On a small scale maybe, but nevertheless...

Yes, the thieves was a predictable yet depressing development.

It's been two weeks of many emails back and forth and I've only just finally been able to remove my images from Pixabay (even if I deleted my account they were still active).

Worst business model ever, hope it's a cautionary tale to anybody considering uploading in there for whatever reason.


Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #49 on: September 21, 2023, 14:42 »
+2
https://petapixel.com/2023/09/21/photographers-experiment-sees-78k-photos-downloaded-zero-donations/

Fame at last!

The author/editors of the article deliberately omitted to mention that many accounts from South Asia downloaded my images for free and tried to re-sell at SS, AS and iStock. Perhaps they don't want to rock the boat with those agencies. At least they linked it to the blog post where I mentioned it many times.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
5490 Views
Last post August 24, 2007, 17:47
by leaf
36 Replies
13192 Views
Last post July 15, 2008, 16:23
by vphoto
8 Replies
5688 Views
Last post June 01, 2009, 09:45
by Jonathan Ross
16 Replies
6425 Views
Last post February 22, 2010, 18:19
by donding
17 Replies
12839 Views
Last post January 13, 2019, 14:26
by GrayMouse

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors