MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: photosales2015 on June 14, 2015, 07:11
-
DO NOT sell with Demotix!
I won't recommend anyone to sell their own work through Demotix. I am now warning anyone who may not be aware how they operate.
And here's why:
A few months ago I registered with Demotix to sell some of my photos through them. They had a nice and shiny platform, well presented. But they rejected the photos and claimed they were "too small" (2500x2500px) and not up to par with their standards. The photos are in excellent quality.
While claiming to have rejected them they forwarded the images to other agencies they collaborate with and started selling them anyways without paying me a single dime. I began finding my photos on over 30 international newspapers when a major story broke. In fact, my photos were republished repeatedly for weeks whenever the incident would be mentioned. After finding my photos duplicated in news reports water stamped with "AFP" as the original copyright holder (!) I contacted Demotix and I also contacted AFP to ask why my photos were being published as their copyright domain. No answer. I contacted them again and again, with no answer from either sources.
I then immediately went to delete my images from their account but the account doesn't allow you to just delete them as you wish... So I contacted them again to demand they delete all my images from their database asaps and explained that I wanted to close my account. That didn't work either. After a week I got a response. Instead of deleting them as I had asked, they tried to cling on to them claiming "are you sure you want us to delete them? The images have been issued to our international network" and should I delete them each network would have to be asked to delete them too. I again emailed them to demand they delete the images. I have never received a response. I have repeatedly demanded to delete my images and my account, and I am getting nowhere with it.
So, although they had rejected my images and were not paying me for them, they had in fact published them for sale on other databases, to other agencies. By not selling them through their own name, they leave the legal and financial burden on YOU to prove they sold them and infringed on your copyright, which is extremely expensive and a difficult process.
In other words Demotix sells YOUR photos to other photo agencies. So if you see your pictures elsewhere they have indeed sold them, and collect profits and left you out. The whole company should be dragged to court for copyright infringement.
I read that one professional press photographer received a payments of around £3 for several of his photos sold through Demotix that appeared in the press. But fact is that the press had purchased his photos for £300 each and up to £2,000 for some front pagers. He sure didn't get his "50/50" profit split. >:(
I warn people not to use Demotix. Its far better to create your own website and do mailing campaigns to the press for your photos.
-
I did a rough calculation as to what I should been paid when the news story broke and my images got plastered in the press and TV all over the world, and the repeated use of my images. Demotix basically scammed me of an estimated £20,000 in revenues.
-
@photosales2015:
Where are you based?
Depending on your location and the location of the agencies using your photos I wonder why you don't use a lawyer to sort this thing out?
-
AFP have a history of taking the mickey with copyrights.
http://www.pdnonline.com/news/AFP-Washington-Post-7312.shtml (http://www.pdnonline.com/news/AFP-Washington-Post-7312.shtml)
-
@photosales2015:
Where are you based?
Depending on your location and the location of the agencies using your photos I wonder why you don't use a lawyer to sort this thing out?
Have you ever been through a legal process? Do you even know how incredibly expensive and long-drawn it is? I had one in the past that cost me over $120,000 and was a complete waste. You need a tremendous amount of funds to fight a legal battle like this.
-
Good post, good info, I am in video but I stick to Pond5, sometimes these new agencies look good but one never knows for sure and next thing you know your product is out in the wild, stolen and re-stolen and you never get it back. Think I will shy away from any new agencies for awhile until they are proven safe.
Furious when I read these stories about photographers and videographers being taken advantage of like this, already we are paid next to nothing for our skills and work, at least that was the case for me in TV news in Toronto Canada, trying to get paid what we are worth in this industry is near impossible. Other industries not as bad, web developers skills are work something and they get paid that, general contractors...same thing, auto mechanics, skilled labour....all get paid what they are worth but not in this business.
And the bandits know that most photographers can't afford lawyers, same with the TV stations, they can and will openly break the rules and say "sue us" and they know we can't so they just do it. A couple of nice multi-million dollar lawsuits need to happen and then maybe the message will get through. Risk of suing, at least in Canada is if you do lose, you pay your legal costs plus the costs of the other side....very very high risk, you may be in the right but if you lose on a technicality you are in serious trouble.
M
http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG (http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG)
-
be sure to post your story all over the internet. cyber justice can be very effective
https://www.facebook.com/Demotix (https://www.facebook.com/Demotix)
hit them here too
-
I don't know about demotix, but when an image is usually licensed for editorial use by a news agency, syndication is (sadly) included. ie, they can feed their story to anyone who wants to pick it up, and that includes the images.
-
I don't know about demotix, but when an image is usually licensed for editorial use by a news agency, syndication is (sadly) included. ie, they can feed their story to anyone who wants to pick it up, and that includes the images.
But what if they are rejected by the parent agency (Demotix in this case)?
-
Thank you for the warning. Sorry for you. Best of luck for future. Twitted link to this story.
-
That sounds like a complete mess.
I had never heard of Demotix, but I went to look at their site and noted at the bottom that they're owned by Corbis
http://www.demotix.com/blog/shout/1596138/demotix-acquired-by-corbis (http://www.demotix.com/blog/shout/1596138/demotix-acquired-by-corbis)
Have you considered writing up something and complaining to Corbis? They may not sell much but they're not a fly-by-night outfit and probably would care about their reputation enough to make this right
-
@photosales2015:
Where are you based?
Depending on your location and the location of the agencies using your photos I wonder why you don't use a lawyer to sort this thing out?
Have you ever been through a legal process? Do you even know how incredibly expensive and long-drawn it is? I had one in the past that cost me over $120,000 and was a complete waste. You need a tremendous amount of funds to fight a legal battle like this.
I just want everybody to be aware that this is only true in the U.S. and a few other select countries. In my native Germany, for example, it is almost always worth getting a lawyer to deal with image sleuth.
-
Do you have the images up on any of your own sites as proof that they are yours? If you do, you can include those URLs and send DMCA takedown notices to the sites. It won't get your money, but I've found the best way to get companies to take notice of you is to cause trouble with their clients.
-
I don't know about demotix, but when an image is usually licensed for editorial use by a news agency, syndication is (sadly) included. ie, they can feed their story to anyone who wants to pick it up, and that includes the images.
We used to make residuals of that usage, I started off by shooting for the newspapers and we got a commission evertime that image was used in another paper or magazine that the paper owned, sadly, these days it's open season on photographer/videographer rights.
As budgets get smaller these companies just openly flout the laws with a "sue us" attitude, they know how little they pay us and know we can't sue.
This spring I caught our national broadcaster downloading my videos and using them on the news, how I caught them?, an intern tracked me down, emailed me, and then asked I call her, I called and she wanted to know "details" on the videos I had on some social media after I spent many hours on a couple of stakeouts to get some action shots in the winter.
They even offered me a special chance to be interviewed and "be on TV", I told her no I have a face for radio and that is why I am on this side of the camera.
So what they did was they used the video and credited me, as if it was ok steal it as long as they credit me except I still to this day can't figure out how to cash in those credits for cash :)
It was content from what is now in these collections that they used for the news.
https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A988461.html (https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A988461.html)
https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A1013880.html (https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A1013880.html)
I didn't bother going after them, lawyers are too expensive, but what got me was how openly they did it, when I found out a couple months later and called them they said, "You point is"?, "we have the right to aggregate anything on the internet" and that was that and hung up on me..
This is our national broadcaster and like everyone else they have been hit by terrible cutbacks and layoffs so now they get spot news video by stealing it where they can, usually from social media/YouTube and they will use it if it can be used unless someone has splashed a copyright right in the middle of the screen.
Times sure have changed.....
M
http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG (http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG)
-
That's terrible, where did they download those videos from - pond5, youtube, or somewhere else?
-
In the states if the lawyers see that there is some real money involved meaning they know they can and will make themselves a good cut of a winning case they will take the case pro bono and you pay nothing.
They get what is due them after the case is settled as do you the plaintiff.
-
I don't know about demotix, but when an image is usually licensed for editorial use by a news agency, syndication is (sadly) included. ie, they can feed their story to anyone who wants to pick it up, and that includes the images.
We used to make residuals of that usage, I started off by shooting for the newspapers and we got a commission evertime that image was used in another paper or magazine that the paper owned, sadly, these days it's open season on photographer/videographer rights.
As budgets get smaller these companies just openly flout the laws with a "sue us" attitude, they know how little they pay us and know we can't sue.
This spring I caught our national broadcaster downloading my videos and using them on the news, how I caught them?, an intern tracked me down, emailed me, and then asked I call her, I called and she wanted to know "details" on the videos I had on some social media after I spent many hours on a couple of stakeouts to get some action shots in the winter.
They even offered me a special chance to be interviewed and "be on TV", I told her no I have a face for radio and that is why I am on this side of the camera.
So what they did was they used the video and credited me, as if it was ok steal it as long as they credit me except I still to this day can't figure out how to cash in those credits for cash :)
It was content from what is now in these collections that they used for the news.
[url]https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A988461.html[/url] ([url]https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A988461.html[/url])
[url]https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A1013880.html[/url] ([url]https://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music-after-effects-photos-illustrations-images-3d-models/1/clipbin%3A1013880.html[/url])
I didn't bother going after them, lawyers are too expensive, but what got me was how openly they did it, when I found out a couple months later and called them they said, "You point is"?, "we have the right to aggregate anything on the internet" and that was that and hung up on me..
This is our national broadcaster and like everyone else they have been hit by terrible cutbacks and layoffs so now they get spot news video by stealing it where they can, usually from social media/YouTube and they will use it if it can be used unless someone has splashed a copyright right in the middle of the screen.
Times sure have changed.....
M
[url]http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG[/url] ([url]http://www.pond5.com/artist/WeatherENG[/url])
That's disgusting - and, of course, illegal, what the broadcaster did and said to you. Just because it's becoming the new 'norm' doesn't make it any less disgusting.
Has it motivated you to replace unwatermarked video with watermarked ones on social sites, or stop putting up unwatermarked videos?
I don't do video, but I do have my copyright smack in middle of images on my site. The next time someone mentions how it detracts from image, I'll share your story, along with my usual comment that I post images with aim of licensing them, period.
- Ann
-
That sounds like a complete mess.
I had never heard of Demotix, but I went to look at their site and noted at the bottom that they're owned by Corbis
[url]http://www.demotix.com/blog/shout/1596138/demotix-acquired-by-corbis[/url] ([url]http://www.demotix.com/blog/shout/1596138/demotix-acquired-by-corbis[/url])
Have you considered writing up something and complaining to Corbis? They may not sell much but they're not a fly-by-night outfit and probably would care about their reputation enough to make this right
I should probably have done that right away when I discovered they sold my photos through their third-hand parties, but instead I contacted Demotix and Agence France (who began publishing them everywhere) which didn't help at all. Neither of them would respond when I demanded an answer.
But its a good point, and thank you. I just wanted to share my direct experience I had with Demotix with others so they don't have to go through the same thing.
Demotix rejected my right to sell the images, but immediately distributed them through their syndicates all over the world, who obviously paid them.
-
And the bandits know that most photographers can't afford lawyers, same with the TV stations, they can and will openly break the rules and say "sue us" and they know we can't so they just do it.
So true.
Maybe a photobucket of the future would be one where paying members have access to an in-house legal team who file copyright claims on behalf of members.
Just an idea.
-
@OP :
write on http://www.lightstalkers.org/ (http://www.lightstalkers.org/) about this mess, it's the only forum with active
photojournalists, some of them also working for AFP, try also their FB page.
-
So true.
Maybe a photobucket of the future would be one where paying members have access to an in-house legal team who file copyright claims on behalf of members.
Just an idea.
if your photos are on sale on their site and they've been published worldwide by several news outlets then Corbis should just pay you, no ifs and no buts.
it doesnt necessarily mean you need to find a lawyer, for starters try contacting Corbis rather than Demotix.
-
I have an account with them. I just checked, I have one story up. No sales. I was writing them an email to close my account but I might as well leave it up. I am kind of running of accounts to close these days. They havent done me any harm, yet, so I will keep an eye out. Thanks for sharing your experience.
-
You could always invoice them for the appropriate amount and sell it to a collection agency or use small claims court if they don't pay. I'm not sure if you are in the same country or not, which would help. I was in a dispute with a large company and once I told them I was filing in small claims court they immediately capitulated.
-
...Demotix rejected my right to sell the images, but immediately distributed them through their syndicates all over the world, who obviously paid them.
That seems like fraudulent conversion to me.
Although you don't know that Demotix was paid by the end user, even if they made it available for free they have no legal right to do this (I take it you didn't give them this right as part of the artist agreement?). Assuming you didn't, it is certainly unethical and potentially both actionable and criminal.
Even if you don't expect to get paid, I'd strongly recommend writing something detailed to Claire Keeley, Corbis's VP & General Counsel
http://corporate.corbis.com/uk/about-us/leadership/ (http://corporate.corbis.com/uk/about-us/leadership/)
This exposes Corbis to lawsuits of all sorts (even if not from you) and I'd think she'd want to know about what Demotix is doing so she can put a stop to it.
-
Legal procedure that should work in general...
1. Write a contract offer, be generous in your favor and certify it by a public notary ( offer them a price per your image they sell online for each day that they have it )
2. State that by the act of not deleting your work in 7 days upon official receiving of your contract offer is a legal confirmation upon agreement between 2 parties.
(same as when you park your car on paying parking spot, act of park is legal confirmation of contract offer)
3. Make sure you have legal evidence that they received your offer (mail with return receipt ) if that's right term in English.
4. If they don't do it after the receiving of the contract and after time you gave them... you have a full legal agreement valid on any court in the world and you just need clear prove they keep the photos and thus agreed on your offer.
5. Then you will need a lawyer so if you are very generous to yourself in the contract offer he/she will probably accept to work for provision and you dont have to invest a dime.
Pretty much sure this will work...
-
I did a rough calculation as to what I should been paid when the news story broke and my images got plastered in the press and TV all over the world, and the repeated use of my images. Demotix basically scammed me of an estimated £20,000 in revenues.
Honestly, I am very curious to know what the story was that broke and which you think would have led you to make "£20,000 in revenues". Can you tell us on this forum?
-
I notice the OP photosales2015 has gone awfully quiet - maybe he/she is on holiday, busy with other things. Nonetheless, as a working photographer myself I would still like to know what the news event was that he/she thinks could have earned revenues of £20,000. Can DM if he/she wants to keep it private.
-
He probably just doesn't feel obliged to answer to you
-
It seems LightStalkers is offline since a long time ... this is yet another sad development, they're all moving to FB and Twitter :(
-
He probably just doesn't feel obliged to answer to you
Yes quite possible - just that the figures he/she suggests they might have earned seem implausible
-
I notice the OP photosales2015 has gone awfully quiet - maybe he/she is on holiday, busy with other things. Nonetheless, as a working photographer myself I would still like to know what the news event was that he/she thinks could have earned revenues of £20,000. Can DM if he/she wants to keep it private.
I signed up to issue a warning based on my own experiences - not to hold daily conversations with trolls. If you don't want to listen to it - go and lose money on Demonix. It's your choice.
If you think you can't make £20,000 on breaking news you must either be joking. £20,000 is nothing. I know photographers who make over £150,000 on two, three photos within a month. They'd find your comment amusing.
-
He probably just doesn't feel obliged to answer to you
No, I don't feel "obliged" to sit on a forum all day long. I've already said what I wanted to say.
I have a pretty intense schedule and I won't be spending the little spare time I have on here. If you're happy with Demotix, go ahead. I was trying to be nice to photographers out there and save them losses.
If you've never made £20,000 out of news, you may wish to reconsider your business model.
-
He probably just doesn't feel obliged to answer to you
No, I don't feel "obliged" to sit on a forum all day long. I've already said what I wanted to say.
I have a pretty intense schedule and I won't be spending the little spare time I have on here. If you're happy with Demotix, go ahead. I was trying to be nice to photographers out there and save them losses.
If you've never made £20,000 out of news, you may wish to reconsider your business model.
Why were you gratutiously snide to SemmickPhoto?
Where did he say anything about Demotix?
Where did he say he was even submitting news?
-
The quotes have become a bit messy.
Not sure why he snapped at me, I was defending him. Probably misunderstood my comment.
-
I notice the OP photosales2015 has gone awfully quiet - maybe he/she is on holiday, busy with other things. Nonetheless, as a working photographer myself I would still like to know what the news event was that he/she thinks could have earned revenues of £20,000. Can DM if he/she wants to keep it private.
I signed up to issue a warning based on my own experiences - not to hold daily conversations with trolls. If you don't want to listen to it - go and lose money on Demonix. It's your choice.
If you think you can't make £20,000 on breaking news you must either be joking. £20,000 is nothing. I know photographers who make over £150,000 on two, three photos within a month. They'd find your comment amusing.
As a working photographer myself, your reluctance to answer even what the event was that you claim you lost revenue on speaks volumes - i even sent you a PM in case you wanted it kept private.
-
Came across this thread and I think you've already smoked out that photosales2015 is the troll. The comment "If you think you can't make £20,000 on breaking news you must either be joking. £20,000 is nothing. I know photographers who make over £150,000 on two, three photos within a month. They'd find your comment amusing." is what I found most amusing.
I honestly think someone needs to wake up and smell the coffee or get back in the DeLorean and come back to the present. How many news pictures have any of us seen in the last 10 years let alone months that you think news organisations would be willing to pay up to 150k for? Do you know anything about the state of the newspaper / magazine industry?
The fact you're not willing to even say what the picture or news event was illustrates that you're not only wasting your time, you're wasting the time of other photographers who actually looking for sensible, sane advice. I think photosales2015 better go back to smoking rolled up five pound notes on your 150k per month earnings mate. Tool.
-
Came across this thread and I think you've already smoked out that photosales2015 is the troll. The comment "If you think you can't make £20,000 on breaking news you must either be joking. £20,000 is nothing. I know photographers who make over £150,000 on two, three photos within a month. They'd find your comment amusing." is what I found most amusing.
I honestly think someone needs to wake up and smell the coffee or get back in the DeLorean and come back to the present. How many news pictures have any of us seen in the last 10 years let alone months that you think news organisations would be willing to pay up to 150k for? Do you know anything about the state of the newspaper / magazine industry?
The fact you're not willing to even say what the picture or news event was illustrates that you're not only wasting your time, you're wasting the time of other photographers who actually looking for sensible, sane advice. I think photosales2015 better go back to smoking rolled up five pound notes on your 150k per month earnings mate. Tool.
If you work for Demotix it would be good to say so upfront. Just asking so everyone knows where they stand. I am always a bit suspicious of first time posters who jump in on super specific topics heavily on one side like this.
Oh and I agree, I can't work out why the OP started attacking people either.
-
I think he was a troll too but having looked at Demotix in the past with a view of uploading to them i did go and have a look at what was being said on their own forums by their contributors. They look to have shut the forums down so perhaps all the bad contributor input was having an effect,glad i did not upload any work to them as they seemed to pay peanuts and treat contributors very badly.
-
I then immediately went to delete my images from their account but the account doesn't allow you to just delete them as you wish...
You can delete images from your account, it's not straight forward, but it's not rocket science either.
I just noticed this on their site. "Demotix reserves the right to pursue unauthorised users of this content. If you violate our intellectual property you may be liable for: actual damages, loss of income, and profits you derive from the use of this image or clip, and, where appropriate, the costs of collection and/or statutory damages."
-
[/quote]
I am always a bit suspicious of first time posters who jump in on super specific topics heavily on one side like this.
Oh and I agree, I can't work out why the OP started attacking people either.
[/quote]
But you're not suspicious about a first time post about a specific, yet non specific front page news pic that no one wanted, yet everyone wanted and sold around the world, yet no one saw and AFP decided to rip it off the web because the Morrel case wasn't enough for them. I'm suspicious about anyone who wastes time on places like this giving crap advice like that. I was made redundant from a picture desk actually but want to make some money on the side through Shutterstock while searching for work So yes you could say I'm a little cynical about the newspaper industry full stop but don't worry I'll take a pic worth 150k this week, I just know it😀
-
Just revisited the demotix website and had a look at their latest blog post,it really does look like they are not answering and are actively avoiding any questions about payments and reporting of sales. Has anyone anything good to say about them as i am still looking for another decent outlet for news/editorial images.