MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: ||RESOLVED|| SS Account Suspended, $1400 Earnings Gone  (Read 4094 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: October 18, 2021, 07:03 »
+2
I don't think they will steal your money, if that is your only concern. And no, I don't work for SS :)

Why wouldn't they keep my money if they think I broke the terms I agreed? Their thinking is that I used a photo I didn't take to earn money on their platform.
I don't think that can pass. Is all your earned amount from that picture in question? If not, they don't have any right to keep it. Besides, they haven't proved anything yet.

Not a single penny has been earned from that photo on Shutterstock. It was only uploaded a couple of weeks ago and something flagged it on their system.


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #26 on: October 18, 2021, 07:13 »
+3
The next logical step for SS would be to buy the MSG, then shut it down.

Shh, never make these kinds of suggestions, they might do it.  ;D

« Reply #27 on: October 18, 2021, 10:33 »
+19
I would like to say that my account has been restored following their investigation.

Thanks everyone for the messages and I guess it's worth waiting a few more days before truly panicking and reaching out to the forum...!

« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2021, 11:23 »
+2
I am glad it could be resolved!
All is not lost after all.

« Reply #29 on: October 18, 2021, 12:05 »
0
The next logical step for SS would be to buy the MSG, then shut it down.

You're right. That really could happen.

Wonder what Leaf's price would be?

« Reply #30 on: October 18, 2021, 12:12 »
+6
I would like to say that my account has been restored following their investigation.

Thanks everyone for the messages and I guess it's worth waiting a few more days before truly panicking and reaching out to the forum...!

Very glad that there was a positive outcome.

It might help for future readers if you changed the title of the topic - perhaps to something like "SS account suspended with no notice, but restored after leisurely investigation"

« Reply #31 on: October 18, 2021, 12:13 »
0
Still appears you are guilty until proven innocent  :-[

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #32 on: October 18, 2021, 12:42 »
+3
Still appears you are guilty until proven innocent  :-[

Only after they have done a primary investigation and got it wrong. Most of the time we see the opposite, where nothing gets done and the image thieves accounts stay active for weeks and months. SS must fear closing accounts based on complaints, so they are extra careful to not do that. Even to the point of writing to someone who files, a threatening sounding reply about how filing a false complaint could get their account terminated. That's discouraging.

Obviously in this case they were wrong! Good news, it was corrected, just as others who were unjustly locked.

So do you want swift justice for the ones you don't like, or careful investigations, even though it means some turd has all stolen images? Seems like this case took less time than others where SS made a mistake and reversed their decision. Balance...

« Reply #33 on: October 18, 2021, 13:18 »
+1
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

No I'm not, I wouldn't take that job, and no I'm not a fan of being cut down or what has happened recently. I'm just asking for a little bit of patience.

When we ask for action, they take time, then some people become hostile, because SS doesn't act fast enough. When they do make a mistake and close an account, that shouldn't be closed, some will say they acted too fast. We have seen over time, that the mistakes are eventually corrected.

That's all. I said IF, don't twist my words please.

You can have fast action, or allow for agency investigations into details. But you can't have review of theft without some errors. I hate to see someone wrongly accused of something they haven't done.

My personal hope is that the OP will come back and tell us that the unfortunate error was corrected and his earnings and account were fully restored. In the past they have been.

What's your point in accusing me which has nothing to do with the actual situation?

😳
I asked a question. Would be good to have a direct liason with SS in here like adobe do. You should take your own advice and stop being so hostile. If you do not like responses to the tomes you write, you should perhaps restrict what you have to say to prevent anyone daring to interact with you. Something I will not attempt again. How aggressive.

« Reply #34 on: October 18, 2021, 13:42 »
+1
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

No I'm not, I wouldn't take that job, and no I'm not a fan of being cut down or what has happened recently. I'm just asking for a little bit of patience.

When we ask for action, they take time, then some people become hostile, because SS doesn't act fast enough. When they do make a mistake and close an account, that shouldn't be closed, some will say they acted too fast. We have seen over time, that the mistakes are eventually corrected.

That's all. I said IF, don't twist my words please.

You can have fast action, or allow for agency investigations into details. But you can't have review of theft without some errors. I hate to see someone wrongly accused of something they haven't done.

My personal hope is that the OP will come back and tell us that the unfortunate error was corrected and his earnings and account were fully restored. In the past they have been.

What's your point in accusing me which has nothing to do with the actual situation?

😳
I asked a question. Would be good to have a direct liason with SS in here like adobe do. You should take your own advice and stop being so hostile. If you do not like responses to the tomes you write, you should perhaps restrict what you have to say to prevent anyone daring to interact with you. Something I will not attempt again. How aggressive.

Yep, it's an odd phenomenon on this forum.  The 'new' contributors (mainly from the hated SS) are being accused of being aggressive (when they are not) in an aggressive/hostile way by the 'old' contributors ...as evidenced on this thread and others ... quite sad really ..

« Last Edit: October 18, 2021, 13:44 by DOP »

« Reply #35 on: October 18, 2021, 14:12 »
+1
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

BINGO!!! There's a perfect example of the hostility that we really don't need brought in from elsewhere.

Having hung out for many years on this forum with Pete, I'd bet my life that he is not a Shitterstock liaison.

Really?  I think maybe that's projection ...

« Reply #36 on: October 18, 2021, 14:47 »
+2
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

BINGO!!! There's a perfect example of the hostility that we really don't need brought in from elsewhere.

Having hung out for many years on this forum with Pete, I'd bet my life that he is not a Shitterstock liaison.

Really?  I think maybe that's projection ...

I strongly doubt that many others here would agree with you on that.

« Reply #37 on: October 18, 2021, 14:55 »
+1
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

No I'm not, I wouldn't take that job, and no I'm not a fan of being cut down or what has happened recently. I'm just asking for a little bit of patience.

When we ask for action, they take time, then some people become hostile, because SS doesn't act fast enough. When they do make a mistake and close an account, that shouldn't be closed, some will say they acted too fast. We have seen over time, that the mistakes are eventually corrected.

That's all. I said IF, don't twist my words please.

You can have fast action, or allow for agency investigations into details. But you can't have review of theft without some errors. I hate to see someone wrongly accused of something they haven't done.

My personal hope is that the OP will come back and tell us that the unfortunate error was corrected and his earnings and account were fully restored. In the past they have been.

What's your point in accusing me which has nothing to do with the actual situation?

😳
I asked a question. Would be good to have a direct liason with SS in here like adobe do. You should take your own advice and stop being so hostile. If you do not like responses to the tomes you write, you should perhaps restrict what you have to say to prevent anyone daring to interact with you. Something I will not attempt again. How aggressive.

We once had that on Shutterforum. I remember Alex (admin) preventing someone's account from being closed because of a false accusation of having too many Similars. Nice to have someone like that. But that was a long time ago. I don't think they are closing the forum to let admins join in on Microstock afterwards to help.  :)
I read your answer as well as the others, that you had doubts about Pete.
Now that everyone's rightfully up for Pete, you're attacking him for answering at length.
I've known Pete for a long time too. Apparently a detailed explanation is useful. Because nobody understood your brief explanation. (Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact. By which you meant: Would be good to have a directliason with SS in here like adobe do.)
« Last Edit: October 18, 2021, 15:10 by thijsdegraaf »

« Reply #38 on: October 18, 2021, 14:58 »
+2
It's good that everything turned out okay in the end. I actually didn't expect that.
I wonder what Shutterstock does with the money from a closed account with stolen photos. Would they pay back the customer who bought the photos, or compensate the people whose photos were stolen?  :D
« Last Edit: October 18, 2021, 15:40 by thijsdegraaf »

« Reply #39 on: October 18, 2021, 15:36 »
+2
It might help for future readers if you changed the title of the topic - perhaps to something like "SS account suspended with no notice, but restored after leisurely investigation"

I did look how to do this, but the topic title can't be changed. If a mod can, that would be great.

Still appears you are guilty until proven innocent  :-[

It's not like I'm a new account, it could have been dealt with differently.

So do you want swift justice for the ones you don't like, or careful investigations, even though it means some turd has all stolen images? Seems like this case took less time than others where SS made a mistake and reversed their decision. Balance...


I think that it would be understandable for a new account to have the ban hammer as swiftly thrown down, but I've been on there for six years. I'm far from a veteran in this industry, but surely enough time on the platform to warrant an email to say that something was flagged up.

« Reply #40 on: October 18, 2021, 15:40 »
0
But it's good that everything turned out okay in the end. I actually didn't expect that.
I wonder what Shutterstock does with the money from a closed account with stolen photos. Would they pay back the customer who bought the photos, or compensate the people whose photos were stolen?  :D

Thijs,

I don't think they pay any compensation to the copyright owner. I assume that they just keep the money. In many cases you can find an identical image in four or five portfolios. There were lots of those examples. How would they know who took the Image. Especially in the case when the person who took the picture doesn't even offer at shutterstock - that also happens often enough. I have also never read or heard that a contributors was compensated.

« Reply #41 on: October 18, 2021, 16:12 »
+3
...

So do you want swift justice for the ones you don't like, or careful investigations, even though it means some turd has all stolen images? Seems like this case took less time than others where SS made a mistake and reversed their decision. Balance...

For a contributor who has been with them for more than (let's say) 1 year, what I would expect is that Shutterstock would contact the contributor to say an ownership issue had been raised about one item in their portfolio and could they please provide (specify what evidence they'll accept) to verify the ownership of the item.

SS doesn't pay out on request, but they could mark the account to withhold monthly payments until the issue is resolved. If the contributor doesn't respond to the request promptly, SS could suspend the account (i.e. nothing will sell) until they do get a response and after (let's say) 4 weeks, close the account if there's still no response.

The majority of the scam accounts occur with new contributors, not with people who have been with them for a long time. Not to do existing contributors the courtesy of asking about a questionable item before allowing an automated process, or a human complaint is not reasonable or fair. I suspect that SS takes this route because they are trying to cut their costs wherever possible and  having human inspectors or a reasonable contributor support process costs money.


« Reply #42 on: October 18, 2021, 16:19 »
+3
...
I wonder what Shutterstock does with the money from a closed account with stolen photos. Would they pay back the customer who bought the photos, or compensate the people whose photos were stolen?  :D
...
I don't think they pay any compensation to the copyright owner. I assume that they just keep the money. In many cases you can find an identical image in four or five portfolios. There were lots of those examples. How would they know who took the Image. Especially in the case when the person who took the picture doesn't even offer at shutterstock - that also happens often enough. I have also never read or heard that a contributors was compensated.
[/quote]

I used to be with Shutterstock (contributor #249) and recently had to contact them about a photo of mine that had been uploaded to SS by a thief. In my contacts with SS I asked for an accounting of how many times it had been sold and how much I was owed as royalties. The image was marked as "Commonly used" when in the thief's portfolio.

I have never heard of them compensating the owner in the case of theft, but figured it couldn't hurt to ask. That image was in my SS portfolio before they closed it (and I suspect they still have all the records of my account and portfolio), so there's no issue about who owns the image. As you might expect, I have not received an accounting and I haven't been paid anything :)

« Reply #43 on: October 18, 2021, 16:21 »
+1
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

No I'm not, I wouldn't take that job, and no I'm not a fan of being cut down or what has happened recently. I'm just asking for a little bit of patience.

When we ask for action, they take time, then some people become hostile, because SS doesn't act fast enough. When they do make a mistake and close an account, that shouldn't be closed, some will say they acted too fast. We have seen over time, that the mistakes are eventually corrected.

That's all. I said IF, don't twist my words please.

You can have fast action, or allow for agency investigations into details. But you can't have review of theft without some errors. I hate to see someone wrongly accused of something they haven't done.

My personal hope is that the OP will come back and tell us that the unfortunate error was corrected and his earnings and account were fully restored. In the past they have been.

What's your point in accusing me which has nothing to do with the actual situation?

😳
I asked a question. Would be good to have a direct liason with SS in here like adobe do. You should take your own advice and stop being so hostile. If you do not like responses to the tomes you write, you should perhaps restrict what you have to say to prevent anyone daring to interact with you. Something I will not attempt again. How aggressive.

We once had that on Shutterforum. I remember Alex (admin) preventing someone's account from being closed because of a false accusation of having too many Similars. Nice to have someone like that. But that was a long time ago. I don't think they are closing the forum to let admins join in on Microstock afterwards to help.  :)
I read your answer as well as the others, that you had doubts about Pete.
Now that everyone's rightfully up for Pete, you're attacking him for answering at length.
I've known Pete for a long time too. Apparently a detailed explanation is useful. Because nobody understood your brief explanation. (Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact. By which you meant: Would be good to have a directliason with SS in here like adobe do.)

I'm afraid we gauge 'everyone' and 'everybody' substantially differently. If you and 'everybody' assume aggression  from my question despite a clarifying answer, this says something about your perceptions or interpretations of things. But please think whatever you wish it is apparent that your mind has been made up. And nothing it seems can change that. Even the truth. Odd behaviour indeed.

« Reply #44 on: October 18, 2021, 16:43 »
0
But it's good that everything turned out okay in the end. I actually didn't expect that.
I wonder what Shutterstock does with the money from a closed account with stolen photos. Would they pay back the customer who bought the photos, or compensate the people whose photos were stolen?  :D

Thijs,

I don't think they pay any compensation to the copyright owner. I assume that they just keep the money. In many cases you can find an identical image in four or five portfolios. There were lots of those examples. How would they know who took the Image. Especially in the case when the person who took the picture doesn't even offer at shutterstock - that also happens often enough. I have also never read or heard that a contributors was compensated.

Hi Wilm,
Good to see you here. No, I was already afraid of that.
Thanks Jo Ann for your explanation.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #45 on: October 19, 2021, 12:00 »
+2
...

So do you want swift justice for the ones you don't like, or careful investigations, even though it means some turd has all stolen images? Seems like this case took less time than others where SS made a mistake and reversed their decision. Balance...

For a contributor who has been with them for more than (let's say) 1 year, what I would expect is that Shutterstock would contact the contributor to say an ownership issue had been raised about one item in their portfolio and could they please provide (specify what evidence they'll accept) to verify the ownership of the item.

SS doesn't pay out on request, but they could mark the account to withhold monthly payments until the issue is resolved. If the contributor doesn't respond to the request promptly, SS could suspend the account (i.e. nothing will sell) until they do get a response and after (let's say) 4 weeks, close the account if there's still no response.

The majority of the scam accounts occur with new contributors, not with people who have been with them for a long time. Not to do existing contributors the courtesy of asking about a questionable item before allowing an automated process, or a human complaint is not reasonable or fair. I suspect that SS takes this route because they are trying to cut their costs wherever possible and  having human inspectors or a reasonable contributor support process costs money.

Far too logical, reasonable and rational Jo Ann.  :) Sure I agree with what you wrote.

They are not reasonable or fair, and I'll add again, they seem to drag their feet on closing accounts with obvious stolen, copied and altered images as well. Our complaints are ignored and those of us who have tried, for theft not mickey mouse similar and personal revenge, have received the standard response which threatens us with having our accounts closed, and asks for all kinds of details and sometimes states that only the owner can file a complaint.
 
Whoever investigated this case, unless it was SS bots that made the discovery, totally blew it and locked the account unjustly. Good that things worked out.

« Reply #46 on: October 26, 2021, 07:08 »
0
If the OP is the original artist, they will re-instate his account and return the money.



Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact.

No I'm not, I wouldn't take that job, and no I'm not a fan of being cut down or what has happened recently. I'm just asking for a little bit of patience.

When we ask for action, they take time, then some people become hostile, because SS doesn't act fast enough. When they do make a mistake and close an account, that shouldn't be closed, some will say they acted too fast. We have seen over time, that the mistakes are eventually corrected.

That's all. I said IF, don't twist my words please.

You can have fast action, or allow for agency investigations into details. But you can't have review of theft without some errors. I hate to see someone wrongly accused of something they haven't done.

My personal hope is that the OP will come back and tell us that the unfortunate error was corrected and his earnings and account were fully restored. In the past they have been.

What's your point in accusing me which has nothing to do with the actual situation?

😳
I asked a question. Would be good to have a direct liason with SS in here like adobe do. You should take your own advice and stop being so hostile. If you do not like responses to the tomes you write, you should perhaps restrict what you have to say to prevent anyone daring to interact with you. Something I will not attempt again. How aggressive.

We once had that on Shutterforum. I remember Alex (admin) preventing someone's account from being closed because of a false accusation of having too many Similars. Nice to have someone like that. But that was a long time ago. I don't think they are closing the forum to let admins join in on Microstock afterwards to help.  :)
I read your answer as well as the others, that you had doubts about Pete.
Now that everyone's rightfully up for Pete, you're attacking him for answering at length.
I've known Pete for a long time too. Apparently a detailed explanation is useful. Because nobody understood your brief explanation. (Are you Shutterstock liason? Curious how you state as fact. By which you meant: Would be good to have a directliason with SS in here like adobe do.)

I'm afraid we gauge 'everyone' and 'everybody' substantially differently. If you and 'everybody' assume aggression  from my question despite a clarifying answer, this says something about your perceptions or interpretations of things. But please think whatever you wish it is apparent that your mind has been made up. And nothing it seems can change that. Even the truth. Odd behaviour indeed.

You are the one accusing and hostile, that's why some here have asked you to calm down. SS did have contacts and all that happened was they were attacked personally, accused, insulted and much treated like you do to somebody here. Other agencies also had liasons who gave up and left, because of lack of civil questions or discussion. That's why the agencies don't send anyone anymore, people like you.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
4369 Views
Last post June 14, 2007, 10:08
by Gimmerton
35 Replies
26450 Views
Last post September 02, 2007, 15:32
by leaf
30 Replies
16191 Views
Last post October 02, 2011, 07:03
by leaf
4 Replies
2978 Views
Last post February 06, 2014, 09:58
by Goofy
4 Replies
4301 Views
Last post July 18, 2018, 08:25
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle