MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: JPuk on January 07, 2013, 04:29
-
I closed my account in Sept 2011 but to my shock today, found a few hundred of my images still available on thinkstock and photos.com, under the same username I had on iStock but with CLOSED at the end ie 'usernameCLOSED'.
To make matters worse, I have just found a number of images that have been licenced recently (ie well after my account closure) with the 'usernameCLOSED' image credit, without any royalty payments to me.
Does anyone had the same experience?
-
Woah, that is really shocking! Have you been in touch with IStock about it?
-
I have sent them a message this morning but no reply as yet!
-
please keep us updated. Can you link to the images?
-
Almost every week I read something that is worse then what I read before about agencies. My trust is almost completely gone in them. It seems all stock agencies are scamming photographers and their policy changes on royalties are sheer malpractice. But what I just dont is why they can do all this legally without any repercussion. Something must be done about this. But I dont know what. I am sorry jpuk this is happening to you.
-
I think the problem is that the photographers donīt sue. That is what the justice system does - it keeps everyone in the business cycle on their toes. If the car manufacturers werenīt suing so aggressively, we would all upload many pictures with cars in them, or any other copyrighted material.
The music industry has done a great job of getting people to pay for their content by buying it online. But they needed court cases to make it painful to go against the law.
The photographers will have to do the same if agencies abuse their images and donīt resolve issues in a timely manner. They donīt own our files, we do.
But court cases and lawyers are so expensive, it also takes up a great amount of your time.
-
But court cases and lawyers are so expensive, it also takes up a great amount of your time.
The beauty of microstock is many of us (not me) are lawyers... eliminating one of the expenses. The microsotck companies just need to rub the right person the wrong way.
-
No response from iStockphoto yet.
-
this is as bad as a thief stealing one of our images, in this case a few hundreds and by a stock agency which is 100 times worst, nice job iStock again!
-
That's pretty disturbing. I definitely had a fear of losing control of my images when they announced the forced migration. I just didn't realize it might actually happen to someone.
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
Only for people who have no IS account. Since some never passed the test and had StockXpert accounts, they are paid from ThinkStock via StockXpert. Anyone who has an IS account was transfered to IS payments.
It's kind of confusing but that's the way it is and there are no payments from ThinkStock, none from Photos.com. They are both routed through one of the other two options. And people should only get paid by One or the Other, not have two accounts.
And about that photos being used, without permission, someone did try to file a suit, if she wants to join in and explain what happened, it could be of interest. I never heard the final word, just that she had a lawyer and was looking into it. Seems complicated.
-
I think I will go over to thinkstock and have a look for my images. Here's hoping I am disappointed. >:(
update: did a few searches for my most popular images and didn't find them. whew. I was out of there before the forced migration. In fact when they first started shuffling them over from stockexpert I opted out but they managed to find their way there anyway. I put up a stink (back in the days when people actually answered the phone) and they were removed. Hopefully that is the end of it.
Sorry this has happened to you. I can imagine how livid you must be. I would be.
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
Only for people who have no IS account. Since some never passed the test and had StockXpert accounts, they are paid from ThinkStock via StockXpert. Anyone who has an IS account was transfered to IS payments.
It's kind of confusing but that's the way it is and there are no payments from ThinkStock, none from Photos.com. They are both routed through one of the other two options. And people should only get paid by One or the Other, not have two accounts.
And about that photos being used, without permission, someone did try to file a suit, if she wants to join in and explain what happened, it could be of interest. I never heard the final word, just that she had a lawyer and was looking into it. Seems complicated.
I have always had an IS account, but my images made their way to TS via stockxpert and that's still how they're tracked and how I see the earnings from TS (as far as I know...) - seems like if the OP is in the same situation, it's worth a look.
-
Istock... the banana republic of stock.
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
Only for people who have no IS account. Since some never passed the test and had StockXpert accounts, they are paid from ThinkStock via StockXpert. Anyone who has an IS account was transfered to IS payments.
It's kind of confusing but that's the way it is and there are no payments from ThinkStock, none from Photos.com. They are both routed through one of the other two options. And people should only get paid by One or the Other, not have two accounts.
And about that photos being used, without permission, someone did try to file a suit, if she wants to join in and explain what happened, it could be of interest. I never heard the final word, just that she had a lawyer and was looking into it. Seems complicated.
I have always had an IS account, but my images made their way to TS via stockxpert and that's still how they're tracked and how I see the earnings from TS (as far as I know...) - seems like if the OP is in the same situation, it's worth a look.
Same here. I'm still collecting sales from iStock and StockXpert for thinkstock sales.
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
Only for people who have no IS account. Since some never passed the test and had StockXpert accounts, they are paid from ThinkStock via StockXpert. Anyone who has an IS account was transfered to IS payments.
It's kind of confusing but that's the way it is and there are no payments from ThinkStock, none from Photos.com. They are both routed through one of the other two options. And people should only get paid by One or the Other, not have two accounts.
And about that photos being used, without permission, someone did try to file a suit, if she wants to join in and explain what happened, it could be of interest. I never heard the final word, just that she had a lawyer and was looking into it. Seems complicated.
I have always had an IS account, but my images made their way to TS via stockxpert and that's still how they're tracked and how I see the earnings from TS (as far as I know...) - seems like if the OP is in the same situation, it's worth a look.
Same here. I'm still collecting sales from iStock and StockXpert for thinkstock sales.
exactly, Hemera collection at Thinkstock (sales that are seen at StockXpert)
-
It was images that were on StockXpert but not on IS that were migrated to TS from StockXpert. If the same image was on both then it went from IS. As far as I know, none of mine went via the "Herema collection".
-
Interesting (but horrible) situation. I'm very curious how Istock will reply and make things up to you. If not, you'll have a pretty strong case, in my opinion.
-
Incredible attitude :o ..... Well, another check point on the NOT JOINING IS list.
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
Only for people who have no IS account. Since some never passed the test and had StockXpert accounts, they are paid from ThinkStock via StockXpert. Anyone who has an IS account was transfered to IS payments.
It's kind of confusing but that's the way it is and there are no payments from ThinkStock, none from Photos.com. They are both routed through one of the other two options. And people should only get paid by One or the Other, not have two accounts.
And about that photos being used, without permission, someone did try to file a suit, if she wants to join in and explain what happened, it could be of interest. I never heard the final word, just that she had a lawyer and was looking into it. Seems complicated.
If enough photographers find their work being misused by IS and StockXpert, I do have a well-respected copyright attorney who is interested in putting together a case on contingency. We just need about 30-40 people to file a class action and force an audit. I and many others around here have StockXpert images being sold at Photos.com and have no record of being paid for sales for well over a year. There are also folks who have terminated their StockXpert accounts, but their images are still being sold at Photos.com and Thinkstock. This latest news about IS doesn't surprise me at all.
I'd like to know where all that money is going, because it sure isn't going to us.
-
Are your thinkstock sales tracked from stockxpert.com instead of istock?
Only for people who have no IS account. Since some never passed the test and had StockXpert accounts, they are paid from ThinkStock via StockXpert. Anyone who has an IS account was transfered to IS payments.
It's kind of confusing but that's the way it is and there are no payments from ThinkStock, none from Photos.com. They are both routed through one of the other two options. And people should only get paid by One or the Other, not have two accounts.
And about that photos being used, without permission, someone did try to file a suit, if she wants to join in and explain what happened, it could be of interest. I never heard the final word, just that she had a lawyer and was looking into it. Seems complicated.
If enough photographers find their work being misused by IS and StockXpert, I do have a well-respected copyright attorney who is interested in putting together a case on contingency. We just need about 30-40 people to file a class action and force an audit. I and many others around here have StockXpert images being sold at Photos.com and have no record of being paid for sales for well over a year. There are also folks who have terminated their StockXpert accounts, but their images are still being sold at Photos.com and Thinkstock. This latest news about IS doesn't surprise me at all.
I'd like to know where all that money is going, because it sure isn't going to us.
I have not found my images being used in this particular situation, but in the past my images have been misused (by another agency). Contributors from that debacle talked about a class action suit. The attorney decided he needed money, i was not willing to turn over money to people i only knew from the net (that might have been a scam too) so i dropped out. That i know of, nothing ever happened. If it did, i would like to know the outcome.
Anyway, i will be happy to support any way i can, if a suit is filed. Dont know if i could join a class if i am not directly involved (that i know of, anyway).
-
I just saw this in the termination part of the ASA:
"notwithstanding termination, iStockphoto and its distribution partners shall have the right to continue licensing Accepted Exclusive Content until it is removed from the Site or other sites where Accepted Exclusive Content is distributed and for up to (1) year following termination where such Accepted Content has previously appeared in iStockphoto's promotional materials, CD programs or Distribution Partner marketing programs"
So it sounds like dropping the crown, deactivating images, whatever means they can continue to sell images (or give them away like they're doing with Google, Microsoft, Zazzle) -- although it says nothing about how they are paid for once the account is closed.
-
I just saw this in the termination part of the ASA:
"notwithstanding termination, iStockphoto and its distribution partners shall have the right to continue licensing Accepted Exclusive Content until it is removed from the Site or other sites where Accepted Exclusive Content is distributed and for up to (1) year following termination where such Accepted Content has previously appeared in iStockphoto's promotional materials, CD programs or Distribution Partner marketing programs"
So it sounds like dropping the crown, deactivating images, whatever means they can continue to sell images (or give them away like they're doing with Google, Microsoft, Zazzle) -- although it says nothing about how they are paid for once the account is closed.
We the contributors would not be paid, as per the contract we were forced to sign if we wished to continue selling through them.
I'm sure they would have a way of ensuring they'd get paid, of course.
-
But court cases and lawyers are so expensive, it also takes up a great amount of your time.
The beauty of microstock is many of us (not me) are lawyers... eliminating one of the expenses. The microsotck companies just need to rub the right person the wrong way.
Exactly! Most of them do whatever they can get away with, and they've been allowed to get away with a lot of garbage lately. It will only continue and worsen until, as you said, Leaf, they hit the "right person the wrong way".