So funny....

Quote from: luceluceluce on July 21, 2011, 08:03
I don't envy your position. Everyone makes mistakes.  It's nice that you're making an effort to do the right thing and help improve the integrity of industry - because that's fairly rare. 

Thank you.

I first lost confidence with pixmac when they were selling extremely low priced subscriptions.  They did stop doing that but then several sites pulled out of their partnerships and with all the other sites available to me, I'm not spending time with one I'm unsure about.  I hope they can repair the damage to their reputation and I might upload again one day but for now, I have enough sites to keep me busy.

Once is a mistake, twice is incompetence and three times IMO looks very dubious. Personally I don't like my images appearing on any of the third party selling agreements the major microstocks have.

Just to add a little more to the 123RF / Pixmac topic.
read here

Quote from: lagereek on July 21, 2011, 07:51
Anybody can make a mistake, so what? Ive done severall, so has GM and the Pres of the United States.

no big deal.

LOL, an both GM and the president have their "companies" engines running like a clockwork?

The financial situations of GM and the USA are disastrous.

Making mistakes is human, but the two entities you mentioned are a perfect example of not learning from the past.

Ok, I haven't read everything but as far as I can see it involves an agency admitting that it has collected money from sales and not paid the commissions, explaining that this is OK because everybody makes mistakes and they're only human, and then announcing that it's whiter than white now because it had proclaimed the industry leading principles for Fair Trade Microstock which sound great, therefore everyone should rush to place their images with this agency.

Is that a fair summary? Because if it is, it is exactly the kind of behaviour I would expect from a company that I would not touch with a bargepole. I won't say anything more specific than that because I wouldn't want to involve Leaf in a libel action.

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 14:45
Ok, I haven't read everything but as far as I can see it involves an agency admitting that it has collected money from sales and not paid the commissions, explaining that this is OK because everybody makes mistakes and they're only human, and then announcing that it's whiter than white now because it had proclaimed the industry leading principles for Fair Trade Microstock which sound great, therefore everyone should rush to place their images with this agency.

Is that a fair summary? Because if it is, it is exactly the kind of behaviour I would expect from a company that I would not touch with a bargepole. ...

Thank you! Since English isn't my native tongue having a hard time bringing my point across, I feel you summed it up quite nicely.

Unfortunately, I now discover that I have more than 2,000 photos there. Is there any way of finding out where they have come from and how I can get them removed?

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 15:08
Unfortunately, I now discover that I have more than 2,000 photos there. Is there any way of finding out where they have come from and how I can get them removed?

I think Zager is more than happy to make things right and will let you know where exactly your images are coming from. Contact him.

Quote from: click_click on July 21, 2011, 15:11

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 15:08
Unfortunately, I now discover that I have more than 2,000 photos there. Is there any way of finding out where they have come from and how I can get them removed?

I think Zager is more than happy to make things right and will let you know where exactly your images are coming from. Contact him.

Since he is apparently in the habit of stalking people whose names he knows, I'm not particularly inclined to spell out who I am.

Does Canstock still have an agreement with them?

To BaldricksTrousers: This discussion is related to a technical issue that was published in January 2011 and happened with our former partner. If you need technical details, please check our company blog and discussions here on MSG forum from that time.

To dirkr, cclapper, trek, sharpshot: Currently there are only two partners no longer distributed via Pixmac. In each case the reason was different. We don't have hi-res files until the file is sold. It is based on API connection, therefor the source agency is tracking all downloads.

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 15:15
Does Canstock still have an agreement with them?

Never had.

Scanstock?

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 15:22
Scanstock?

Nope.

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 15:15

Quote from: click_click on July 21, 2011, 15:11

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 21, 2011, 15:08
Unfortunately, I now discover that I have more than 2,000 photos there. Is there any way of finding out where they have come from and how I can get them removed?

I think Zager is more than happy to make things right and will let you know where exactly your images are coming from. Contact him.

Since he is apparently in the habit of stalking people whose names he knows, I'm not particularly inclined to spell out who I am.

Does Canstock still have an agreement with them?

It could be either 123RF or Yaymicro. With 123RF you can only opt out all resellers at once, though it was announced that that might become more granular in the future. But it seems that this opt out does not work fully, see the thread I linked above (where I'm still waiting for some reply from 123RF).

So I have apparently been living under a rock for a little while now as this thread is the first I've heard of this.  I read that you said there are other blog posts and threads but would you mind either sharing direct links or re-explaining what happened. 

Reading this thread I am speculating that your site received low resolution images from Dreamstime for free to display to potential buyers.  I'm now guessing based on the tone of this thread that you sold those lo-resolution files and did not report the sales to Dreamstime and as a result did not pay the photographers for the sales. 

I have some questions:

Is that accurate?  If not, what happened?

How are the lost sales being tracked and corrected?  Is there an independent auditor involved to ensure fair and accurate results?

Has this happened with other sites you have been partnered with in the past? 

Thanks,

Mat

Quote from: MatHayward on July 21, 2011, 17:13
I read that you said there are other blog posts and threads but would you mind either sharing direct links or re-explaining what happened. 

Our official statements and explanations:
http://blog.pixmac.com/2274/explanation-of-technical-error/
http://blog.pixmac.com/2394/explanation-of-single-purchase/

Quote from: MatHayward on July 21, 2011, 17:13
Has this happened with other sites you have been partnered with in the past? 

Just one.

Quote from: stormchaser on July 21, 2011, 17:29
He's got ports everywhere. Look at his referral icons here. If PM is supposed to be so great, then why bother uploading to other sites? Is it for pocket change or just more spy tactics? As a site CEO one would think that a person of such lofty position would not be bothered with uploading.

What about just trying to put myself into your shoes? And thinking how you guys feel?

Thanks for that.  The explanation in the blog looks much better than this back-and-forth in the forum.  You have an uphill battle with some of these guys I'm afraid.  

Good luck,

Mat

Quote from: zager on July 21, 2011, 17:16

Quote from: MatHayward on July 21, 2011, 17:13
I read that you said there are other blog posts and threads but would you mind either sharing direct links or re-explaining what happened. 

Our official statements and explanations:
http://blog.pixmac.com/2274/explanation-of-technical-error/
http://blog.pixmac.com/2394/explanation-of-single-purchase/

Quote from: MatHayward on July 21, 2011, 17:13
Has this happened with other sites you have been partnered with in the past? 

Just one.

OK Zager, if you are so above board and honest, why don't you just delete every 123 account image that you have there? We were given to understand this relationship ended, but it turns out that you are using my art from 123 to support your dodgy business operation and, no doubt, the art of thousands of other people, also.

It is my opinion that continuing to host work after the relationship with the sites representing that work has terminated is evidence of complete lack of moral standards.

It seems there is no need for me to tell you who I am to get my work deleted, all you have to do is delete all the work from the site you no longer have the right represent but from which you want to profit and my stuff will disappear along with all the rest.

See the part "Etymology" 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court

So what's this thing about 123rf images still not being deleted?

Quote from: luceluceluce on July 21, 2011, 20:49
So what's this thing about 123rf images still not being deleted?

If you have a portfolio over at 123, then do a search on pixmac for a 123 image of yours that is at least six months old. Once you find one there, click on your name under the picture and you get however much of your portfolio they have there.

Or just click this http://www.pixmac.com/author/luceluceluce%40rf

To the pixmac guy

Would also like to know why the term Shutterstock still returns search hits and now also iStockphoto. Don't give us that crap about the Submitter putting this in like the last time i questioned you on this - We're not that stupid.

Here's an example.

http://www.pixmac.com/picture/shutterstockdreamstime123rf/000063827799

It is a very poor business practice to the point of illegal when trading on the business names of others. So riding on the success of others, possibly lifted vectors for your own portfolio.. What next? A new scheme?