pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 82 refunds in the past hour  (Read 9006 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #25 on: January 31, 2013, 06:17 »
0
Another BIG + for working SS.... they NEVER refund. We pay the commission and they deliver.
Fair enough, but do they tell you if a refund was made from their end?
Because the main issue with refunds is what's happening to your files once they're 'out there'.
If you know a file has been refunded, you can be on the lookout for 'dubious' uses.

(Misquoting corrected)
« Last Edit: February 06, 2013, 20:27 by ShadySue »


« Reply #26 on: January 31, 2013, 07:36 »
+1
I still think that is a problem with "10 free credits".
When someone try to make customer account from several different computer and for every account he get 10 credits.Then he may collect hundreds credits and  may purchase" legally" our images.He can make acc from internet caffe,friend computer,every public place....

EmberMike

« Reply #27 on: January 31, 2013, 08:36 »
+4
It's sad, really. For so long, one of the strongest arguments for exclusivity was that you knew where all of your images were licensed from that istock pledged to better support exclusive artists in the event of fraud or theft. Obviously that's not the case anymore.

They you've the perk of being able to opt-in to Getty and partner programs but, oh, wait, doing that now puts you at greater risk of seeing your work go into these Google-like deals.

So, why are people still exclusive?

« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 08:38 by EmberMike »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #28 on: January 31, 2013, 08:46 »
+1

It's sad, really. For so long, one of the strongest arguments for exclusivity was that you knew where all of your images were licensed from that istock pledged to better support exclusive artists in the event of fraud or theft. Obviously that's not the case anymore.

I'm not sure how strong that promise ever was. IME, they seem to email perps once and if they don't take it down, tough.
Look how they don't seem to be able to take down that scam site.
Pinterest: I contact them directly and the images are taken down within hours. Contact istock and you get 'Pinterest is one of our partners'.

EASA:
10b: "iStockphoto reserves the right, at your expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter otherwise subject to indemnification by you, and in such case, you agree to cooperate with iStockphoto's defense of such claim. "
10c "The Supplier agrees that iStockphoto shall have the right to determine whether and to what extent to proceed against a licensee or other third party (an "Infringer") for any violation of a license agreement or alleged infringement of other rights of the Supplier."
and
In the event iStockphoto elects not to proceed against an Infringer, the Supplier shall have the right to proceed against such Infringer for such license violation or infringing action. The Supplier hereby agrees that any monetary recovery it receives as a result of any legal action taken against any such Infringer, to the extent such monies are intended to compensate the Supplier for lost licensing fees or include statutory damages, shall, after deduction of all costs and expenses incurred in gaining such recovery (including, without limitation, reasonable counsel and experts' fees and disbursements on a solicitor and client basis), be divided between the Supplier and iStockphoto pursuant to the provisions of the Compensation section above. - so even if iStock don't take on a case but you do, you still have to divvy the compensation with them.

« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 15:12 by ShadySue »

« Reply #29 on: January 31, 2013, 09:21 »
+2

It's sad, really. For so long, one of the strongest arguments for exclusivity was that you knew where all of your images were licensed from that istock pledged to better support exclusive artists in the event of fraud or theft. Obviously that's not the case anymore.

I'm not sure how strong that promise ever was. IME, they seem to email perps once and if they don't take it down, tough.
Look how they don't seem to be [/i]able to take down that scam site.
Pinterest: I contact them directly and the images are taken down within hours. Contact istock and you get 'Pinterest is one of our partners'.

EASA:
10b: "iStockphoto reserves the right, at your expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter otherwise subject to indemnification by you, and in such case, you agree to cooperate with iStockphoto's defense of such claim. "
10c "The Supplier agrees that iStockphoto shall have the right to determine whether and to what extent to proceed against a licensee or other third party (an "Infringer") for any violation of a license agreement or alleged infringement of other rights of the Supplier."
and
In the event iStockphoto elects not to proceed against an Infringer, the Supplier shall have the right to proceed against such Infringer for such license violation or infringing action. The Supplier hereby agrees that any monetary recovery it receives as a result of any legal action taken against any such Infringer, to the extent such monies are intended to compensate the Supplier for lost licensing fees or include statutory damages, shall, after deduction of all costs and expenses incurred in gaining such recovery (including, without limitation, reasonable counsel and experts' fees and disbursements on a solicitor and client basis), be divided between the Supplier and iStockphoto pursuant to the provisions of the Compensation section above. - so even if iStock don't take on a case but you do, you still have to divvy the compensation with them.

Yeah, that's pretty sick, isn't it? If they sue someone for you and lose because of incompetence then you pay the full legal bill; if you sue someone because they won't and you win, they collect up to 85% of the damages.

I always knew that part of the contract stank, but I had forgotten about it.

Poncke

« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2013, 15:07 »
0
What the heck, I am speechless. I have no words for what is happening to the OP, the response of IS and the bit Sue posted on legal costs.... Its a nightmare.

4Ever Young

« Reply #31 on: January 31, 2013, 16:09 »
0
I'm so glad I said a polite "no thanks" to their stupid crown.  Seems to me it was nothing but a convenient way for them to steal your work, give it away for free, and generally screw you over.  I still have files on IS, making a tiny check every few months, but my best stuff goes to SS.  Not that they wouldn't screw me over too, if it profited them, but at least they might not be so proud of it.  I wish somebody would develop an artist-owned type of agency, that gave us a fair cut of the profits, and actually protected our work.  I'd bet the IS's and SS's would go out of business sooner rather than later.

« Reply #32 on: January 31, 2013, 21:43 »
+2
I got to speak to someone back in Jan after a rash of refunds also.  I called and asked for CR and was told there were no phone calls to them. So i just started asking the person I was talking to the questions.  She confirmed that the refunds were all fraud, and when I questioned it, the response was well I guess someone really likes your car pictures.  I hung up and cancelled exclusivity immediately. 2 more days until I can turn my old SS portfolio back on!

« Reply #33 on: February 01, 2013, 15:32 »
0
Which one of the ninnies was it that once promised us about 2 years ago, I think around the time the RC system was introduced, that there would be no more chargebacks to contributors for fraud?

Of course that was just obviously another of the many broken and unfulfilled iStock promises.

And if they ever setup the Live Chat they promised, another failed iStock brain fart, then we could at least inform them of fraud when we see it happening in real time and possibly reduce the total amount of the fleecing.

I think I must have had a total of over 80 refunds throughout the year last year. So much for promises.

Never mind, as long as I have enough left over to buy a new lens cap I'm good.

I truly pity the OP and I feel your pain. Hang in there. Wait until your anger dies down, and you are thinking straight again, and then decide what you want to do to make it right.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 15:38 by iStop »

« Reply #34 on: February 01, 2013, 16:56 »
0
Which one of the ninnies was it that once promised us about 2 years ago, I think around the time the RC system was introduced, that there would be no more chargebacks to contributors for fraud?

Of course that was just obviously another of the many broken and unfulfilled iStock promises.

And if they ever setup the Live Chat they promised, another failed iStock brain fart, then we could at least inform them of fraud when we see it happening in real time and possibly reduce the total amount of the fleecing.

I think I must have had a total of over 80 refunds throughout the year last year. So much for promises.

Never mind, as long as I have enough left over to buy a new lens cap I'm good.

I truly pity the OP and I feel your pain. Hang in there. Wait until your anger dies down, and you are thinking straight again, and then decide what you want to do to make it right.

What they said, if I remember rightly, was that they wouldn't be doing refunds in the same way in future. In other words, they took a lump sum then, whereas now they take individual amounts.

I was suspicious at the time. Always got to be carefully watch their wording  :(

« Reply #35 on: February 01, 2013, 17:27 »
0
Last year i had 43 refunds at Istock and none at the 9 other sites I am on except a single video on Shutterstock.

« Reply #36 on: February 01, 2013, 21:19 »
+5
Mbug: Yes, I think that was unprofessional what happened to you in the forums. I believe earlier last year they mentioned that they were not going to allow contributors to post happenings of fraud/refunds anymore so maybe they they are making an example out of you. Here is what I suggest you do if you considering dropping the crown. Write a registered letter to the Carlyle group and speak to the new owners about what has happened to you. How long you have been an exclusive, how many files you have, your total earnings and how much istock has made from your work. Explain how you discovered a large amount of refunds and when you tried to post it for answers to your questions you were accused of lying and banned by the moderator. Include the posts/messages and inform them that because of that unprofessional action you're giving up your exclusivity, pulling your illustrations from istock and going to another company. Give a rough estimate of the future total earnings that istock/getty will be loosing from you leaving. At the very least it might give them something to think about when it comes time to renew somebody's "contract".

James H. Hance, Jr.
Operating Executive
Carlyle Group 520 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10022
United States

Unfortunately, it seems the ghosts of Nixon and his crew are alive and well at the istock forums...

An angry President Nixon meets with his Cabinet


Nixon (1995) - President Nixon finds out whats on the recordings

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #37 on: February 02, 2013, 08:43 »
0
^^ also mention the libelling.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2316 Views
Last post March 26, 2010, 00:45
by Microstock Posts
2 Replies
3709 Views
Last post October 09, 2012, 18:41
by ShadySue
38 Replies
10462 Views
Last post March 21, 2014, 04:09
by BoBoBolinski
0 Replies
1775 Views
Last post October 07, 2014, 22:18
by charged
0 Replies
1357 Views
Last post January 03, 2017, 15:49
by KevinM

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle