Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: markrhiggins on January 03, 2012, 16:01

Title: refunds IS
Post by: markrhiggins on January 03, 2012, 16:01
"We regret to inform you that a refund has been issued for a purchase of your file #15770185:

This is in reference to the file downloaded on   16/09/11  for the amount of 2.10

There are a number of reasons why a purchased file may be refunded:

    Accidental/Duplicate download
    Unauthorized or improper use of a credit card
    Incorrect size/format/license purchased

As per our terms and conditions, the client has been advised of their obligations under the Content License Agreement and agrees to the following:

1.    They have destroyed the product (including all copies). Any failure to destroy the product or any use of the product will constitute an infringement of the intellectual property rights of iStock and the contributing artists.
2.    They have not used or copied the product in any way for any purpose whatsoever.
3.    They have not made derivative works from the product.
4.    They have not transferred the product to or permitted the product to be used or copied by a third party.

Please note that due to the high volume of daily transactions, we will be unable to provide additional clarification on the refund performed.

Rest assured that measures are always taken when licenses are withdrawn and images deleted any subsequent unlicensed usage will liable to legal action and penalties, as with any unlicensed use of an iStock file.

The iStockphoto Team"

Really funny. It says one reason may be credit card fraud. They have accepted it to the point it is part of the standard email. But of course if it was credit card fraud the customer has agreed they have not used it and have destoyed their copy.. Ha Ha.
Title: Re: refunds IS
Post by: travelstock on January 03, 2012, 16:14
I got one of these for the same date today as well - 16/09/11 over 3 months ago....
Title: Re: refunds IS
Post by: Sean Locke Photography on January 03, 2012, 16:41
Yeah, I just got one from Sept as well.

However the CC line is about an employee using a CC when they shouldn't during company business.  Not CC fraud.
Title: Re: refunds IS
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on January 03, 2012, 16:57
I know it's been brought up before, but shouldn't there be some sort of time limit on obtaining a refund? I would think that you could discover any "mistakes" - duplicate downloads - or improper credit card use within 2 months. The one exception I think should be given no time limit is when you order a larger size of an image you already purchased - there's no possibility for any sort of shenanigans on the buyer's part and allowing a trade-up seems to benefit everyone.

These days most retail stores limit refunds to 90 days. With the simplicity of a digital refund - no trudging to a store required - and no wish to have microstock operate like the Alamy model where you buy now and pay 6 months later, 60 days seems ample to me.

I know that IS and DT no longer wish to explain the reasons for refunds (which I think is completely unacceptable; if you look at any mail order business they have a whole list of refund codes - put one of those into the system and no human intervention is required to be specific about what happened), but don't you ever wonder what on earth made someone seek a very small refund 3.5 months after the fact?

Given that we have a completely opaque accounting system and so far no steps taken to improve it, in spite of repeated requests/suggestions, I'm not holding my breath. However, FWIW the OP's point that if one of the reasons was unauthorized use of a credit card - the company can't control employee use of a card - why are we to be assured that they can control use or abuse in the destruction of the image? And when an image has been floating around a company for over three months, I'd consider a statement that the file hasn't been copied to be just about worthless.