MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: austriastock on July 29, 2013, 08:26
-
Getty did it again, I'm not sure when they started it but it seems that the German company 1&1 is giving away Getty exclusive photos and illustrations for FREE again. If you saw your pictures on many German websites, this could very well be because 1&1 (one of the biggest hosting companys in Germany) implemented a feature that is very similar to what google offers to its customers.
Users are able to insert pictures for free (after they paid a monthly fee to 1&1) in their personal AND business websites. The whole thing looks so familiar to the google thing that I tend to believe that Getty is bending your contracts again to the extreme. And I guess there are a lot more of that deals then we think.
Many pictures are from Istock exclusives like Yuri / Globalstock also a lot of contibutor that are not so deeply affiliated with Getty.
http://homepage.1und1.de/?linkOrigin=designs&linkId=ct.tabs.diyShowroom.overview (http://homepage.1und1.de/?linkOrigin=designs&linkId=ct.tabs.diyShowroom.overview)
You can insert and download pictures up to size around 800px x 600px.
What a "professional" partner.
Some pictures for your viewing pleasure:
-
Follow
-
And have they 'communicated' this to us?
Have they 'eck as like.
-
The 1&1 advertising says that 25 000 images can be used free of charge and another 5 Million can be accessed for very low prices.
Maybe someone with a 1&1 contract can tell us more. My contract is with domainfactory, the competition.
Have the artists been paid for the "free" images? Is exifdata available in the downloads? How much do the other 5 Million images cost?
1&1 is very popular with probably millions of customers, many of them commercial users.
In fact the package they are promoting is directed at small to medium businesses.
-
Disgusting!
-
Some would say that normally thinking person / company would learn a lesson from contributors reaction to Google/Getty deal. I can't say I'm surprised. In fact I doubt that iS is able to surprise me anymore.
I don't know what these deals bring to iS - not mentioning contributors. It's like restaurant offering 90% discount and naively hoping that satisfied customer would come back again and pay regular price. They won't come back - all of them are like locusts - grazing down everything and moving to other minus XX% offer.
-
And is the name of the artist visible so that the customer can give correct credit on their website. This is a requirement over here.
-
Free usage for users should require an extended license for electronic resale (templates, etc.). But of course, they likely offered them a great deal for a "small" collection for the "publicity". To draw people in with things like this (which do not mention any free images):
http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto (http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto)
http://www.istockphoto.com/1and1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/1and1)
http://faq.1and1.co.uk/website_building/1.html (http://faq.1and1.co.uk/website_building/1.html)
-
Some would say that normally thinking person / company would learn a lesson from contributors reaction to Google/Getty deal. I can't say I'm surprised. In fact I doubt that iS is able to surprise me anymore.
They did say they were going after more of these deals, but that they would be communicated with us, though I'm not sure I can be bothered looking for the post.
Of course they will; they will get a hefty fee for brokering the deal that they don't share with the plebby content providers.
-
Some would say that normally thinking person / company would learn a lesson from contributors reaction to Google/Getty deal.
And from the Getty reaction to the criticism of that deal. Nobody seems to have followed in Sean's footsteps, alerting the iS forums to this latest move.
Yuri should be happy with this arrangement, though.
-
'
-
Some would say that normally thinking person / company would learn a lesson from contributors reaction to Google/Getty deal.
And from the Getty reaction to the criticism of that deal. Nobody seems to have followed in Sean's footsteps, alerting the iS forums to this latest move.
Most of us who would, can't.
-
Some would say that normally thinking person / company would learn a lesson from contributors reaction to Google/Getty deal.
And from the Getty reaction to the criticism of that deal. Nobody seems to have followed in Sean's footsteps, alerting the iS forums to this latest move.
Most of us who would, can't.
And if you could and did, then probably pretty soon you wouldn't be able to any more. I could, but I can't be bothered.
-
Well there is one piece of good news in this: the deal is with istock and not with Thinkstock...
-
This looks ok from what Sean posted. We get paid for the 5 free images at $1/credit correct?
Nobody knows that for sure. It was posted by one of the mods, but referenced a very old post. No-one has confirmed that this is currently the case.
Back in the day, we could opt in to having promotional images used for free. I was opted in for a while, though I thought it was extremely mean of iStock not to at least pay us our percentage of a nominal fee. As soon as the RC thing started I opted out. Whether a lot of people opted out at that time or for some other reason, they enforced a new ASA on us (i.e. if you didn't agree you were out) including the following
In addition to the foregoing grant iStockphoto and its Distribution Partners may post, reproduce, modify, display, make derivative works or otherwise use any Exclusive Content for their own business purposes relating to the promotion of the Site, the Exclusive Content and their distribution programs, and promote the licensing of Exclusive Content (including, without limitation, the use of the Exclusive Content and the Supplier's registered and unregistered trademarks for marketing, sales and promotional efforts whether on the Site or through third parties). The Supplier agrees that iStockphoto shall have exclusive rights to design marketing literature for the Exclusive Content, at its own expense, and the Supplier agrees to cooperate in that regard. No compensation shall be due to the Supplier for use of Exclusive Content for such business purposes.
http://www.istockphoto.com/asa_exclusive.php (http://www.istockphoto.com/asa_exclusive.php) [3b]
Seeing as how they seem to be able to just nominate partners at will, e.g. pinterest and PeopleImages, it could be we're all screwed.
They consistently refused to write their legalese in the ASA, licensing agreements etc in Plain English, and there was a reason for their refusal.
-
The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use
-
Well there is one piece of good news in this: the deal is with istock and not with Thinkstock...
I wish the vice were versa.
Also, from my own selfish pov, at least I don't provide business type images, so I'm not so likely to be impacted.
Doesn't make it right for others.
-
Are only exclusive files among the 25k available for free distribution?
-
'
-
'
-
The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use
What are you even quoting here.
And then why give a negative for asking, I don't see it anywhere in the thread and there is no link. Didn't you get in trouble for negativing everything before?
I voted you down for asking a stupid question, its in the links Sean provided, links you have opened and read yourself. Thats why I gave you a negative. Now go run to Tyler and report me for voting you down. And I have the idea you done that before, since this is the second time you brought that up.
-
'
-
Guys the links Sean posted are for forreign (outside Germany 1&1 sites) the German Website gives them away for FREE. I could insert all pictures and then donwload them in 800 *600 (with "save as") with NO ADDITONAL charge, period.
-
This looks ok from what Sean posted. We get paid for the 5 free images at $1/credit correct? It doesn't seem at all like the google deal.
This is only when the customers wants to access more images then the 25 000 available for free.
For the 25k the artists should probably get an extended license fee for electronic template or something. But how high should a license be that offers free distribution to millions of customers?
Is it another 6 Dollar deal?
-
The 1&1 advertising says that 25 000 images can be used free of charge and another 5 Million can be accessed for very low prices.
Maybe someone with a 1&1 contract can tell us more. My contract is with domainfactory, the competition.
Is exifdata available in the downloads?
1&1 is very popular with probably millions of customers, many of them commercial users.
In fact the package they are promoting is directed at small to medium businesses.
- 25.000 could be correct. Anyway there were a lot very HQ pics for free use even on commercial websites, with no charge.
- You can open an account and cancel it within 30days without charge, just call 0800 850 5555. (so you would be able to test it yourself like I did)
- No Exif data given
-
The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use
What are you even quoting here.
And then why give a negative for asking, I don't see it anywhere in the thread and there is no link. Didn't you get in trouble for negativing everything before?
I voted you down for asking a stupid question, its in the links Sean provided, links you have opened and read yourself. Thats why I gave you a negative. Now go run to Tyler and report me for voting you down. And I have the idea you ratted on me before, since this is the second time you brought that up.
Oh of course I'm a mind reader, let me go through the every post and all four links in this thread to search for your quote. I don't think I have to say this but it's not very useful just to throw up a quote with no reference to who said it or where it came from but thanks for showing how childish you can act again. Glad to see v3 isn't any different than the first two.
Its on the same page you read a couple of minutes before I posted my quote.
This looks ok from what Sean posted. We get paid for the 5 free images at $1/credit correct? It doesn't seem at all like the google deal.
-
The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use
What are you even quoting here.
I don't see it anywhere in the thread and there is no link.
It is in the link Sean gave http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto (http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto) which is by means of being an advert for iStockphoto.
"What is iStockphoto?
The iStockphoto library offers you more than 5 million images for easy and hassle-free integration into your website. The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use. Images are organized by category, and also discoverable via an image search."
So - what sort of stretching of the truth is that? - iStock normal licenses do not allow unlimited use. As I have worked out that my personal lowest credit value for a non-sub sale was 42c, I don't think that could buy even the lowest value EL, far less an all-encompassing EL allowing 'unlimited' use.
-
'
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
-
'
-
This looks ok from what Sean posted. We get paid for the 5 free images at $1/credit correct? It doesn't seem at all like the google deal.
This is only when the customers wants to access more images then the 25 000 available for free.
For the 25k the artists should probably get an extended license fee for electronic template or something. But how high should a license be that offers free distribution to millions of customers?
Is it another 6 Dollar deal?
Right. I was just pointing out that they probably think it is a great idea to get people to get interested in join up.
Like this one, that actually got ELs for people: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=187561 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=187561)
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
I can't tell what's going on in the OP, it's in German and doesn't clearly link to the images or TOS or anything I can make out. Sean's links are different and don't look so bad, they are different than the google deal.
You can see everything in the pictures I attached. Itīs pretty simple: You search for a photo for example "baby" and you get a selection of Istock photos for free use on your personal or commerical website.
-
'
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
I can't tell what's going on in the OP, it's in German and doesn't clearly link to the images or TOS or anything I can make out. Sean's links are different and don't look so bad, they are different than the google deal.
You can see everything in the pictures I attached. Itīs pretty simple: You search for a photo for example "baby" and you get a selection of Istock photos for free use on your personal or commerical website.
Without having access to it, I can't tell if those files are Istock or Getty. Do they come from certain contributors or from all files? Is there a TOS page?
Just read my post, or is the web access down at your place? (addition I also found one of my pictures, and Iīm exclusive)
Problem with this deal: The TOS Page is hard to find or non existing ...
-
some more examples, I just saved a few pages before i canceled my account there since I donīt want to pay the monthly 1&1 fee.
This is the pages that states (Google Translate)
"Over 25,000 professional photos are available for your website at no extra charge. About royalties you do not have to worry. Find the right guaranteed quick photo of the convenient keyword search. Is not your particular favorite motif here, you have access to cost about 5 Million more quality Agency."
http://homepage.1und1.de/preise-und-funktionen?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose (http://homepage.1und1.de/preise-und-funktionen?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose)
klick on the 4th row "Bildarchiv"
-
'
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
I can't tell what's going on in the OP, it's in German and doesn't clearly link to the images or TOS or anything I can make out. Sean's links are different and don't look so bad, they are different than the google deal.
You can see everything in the pictures I attached. Itīs pretty simple: You search for a photo for example "baby" and you get a selection of Istock photos for free use on your personal or commerical website.
Without having access to it, I can't tell if those files are Istock or Getty. Do they come from certain contributors or from all files? Is there a TOS page?
Just read my post, or is the web access down at your place? (addition I also found one of my pictures, and Iīm exclusive)
Problem with this deal: The TOS Page is hard to find or non existing ...
The internet works just fine, the link you provided doesn't offer much information though and what you said is "Many pictures are from Istock exclusives like Yuri / Globalstock also a lot of contibutor that are not so deeply affiliated with Getty." Globalstock and Yuri are not normal Istock contributors by any means, I don't know what "a lot of contributor(s) that are not so deeply affiliated with Getty." I guess you mean contributors that not at all affiliated with Getty, now? Also is the deal only good for paying customers from Germany? That would be a big difference from the Google deal in itself without even knowing what the terms are.
What is your affilation with istock? You are playing this whole thing down. This is serious stuff. Germany is one of the biggest markets for pictures.
Also can anybody check this out:
http://website.1and1.com/pricing?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose (http://website.1and1.com/pricing?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose)
Itīs the american site, seems this is not "only a german thing" since they provide the exact same services:
"Over 25,000 professional images are available for your website at no extra charge. The keyword search makes it easy for you to quickly find the image you are looking for. If you can't find what you are looking for, you will also have access to more than 5 million agency quality images (at an extra cost)."
4th row, thereīs the info about the image library.
-
Also is the deal only good for paying customers from Germany? That would be a big difference from the Google deal in itself without even knowing what the terms are.
Why not check with iS what the terms are and let us know?
As they are offering 25000 pics for free, but promoting the paid collection, that looks as though the 25000 would be within the 'no compensation' clause 3b in the EASA I quoted above.
We need to be told, otherwise a provider of one of the 25000 might find an in use that they thought hadn't been licensed and try to deal with it.
As for ToS, very few people read/adhere to them (going by the number of editorial images I've found in commercial use), and IME iS is usually fairly reluctant to do any more than send an initial email.
-
'
-
'
-
Glad i pulled my port
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
I can't tell what's going on in the OP, it's in German and doesn't clearly link to the images or TOS or anything I can make out. Sean's links are different and don't look so bad, they are different than the google deal.
You can see everything in the pictures I attached. Itīs pretty simple: You search for a photo for example "baby" and you get a selection of Istock photos for free use on your personal or commerical website.
Without having access to it, I can't tell if those files are Istock or Getty. Do they come from certain contributors or from all files? Is there a TOS page?
Just read my post, or is the web access down at your place? (addition I also found one of my pictures, and Iīm exclusive)
Problem with this deal: The TOS Page is hard to find or non existing ...
The internet works just fine, the link you provided doesn't offer much information though and what you said is "Many pictures are from Istock exclusives like Yuri / Globalstock also a lot of contibutor that are not so deeply affiliated with Getty." Globalstock and Yuri are not normal Istock contributors by any means, I don't know what "a lot of contributor(s) that are not so deeply affiliated with Getty." I guess you mean contributors that not at all affiliated with Getty, now? Also is the deal only good for paying customers from Germany? That would be a big difference from the Google deal in itself without even knowing what the terms are.
What is your affilation with istock? You are playing this whole thing down. This is serious stuff. Germany is one of the biggest markets for pictures.
Also can anybody check this out:
[url]http://website.1and1.com/pricing?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose[/url] ([url]http://website.1and1.com/pricing?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose[/url])
Itīs the american site, seems this is not "only a german thing" since they provide the exact same services:
"Over 25,000 professional images are available for your website at no extra charge. The keyword search makes it easy for you to quickly find the image you are looking for. If you can't find what you are looking for, you will also have access to more than 5 million agency quality images (at an extra cost)."
4th row, thereīs the info about the image library.
I'm an exclusive too. I'm not playing it down, I don't even have nearly enough information to know what's going on. From the pictures you posted I can't tell whose images were used. From the link you posted I can't tell which agency is even involved, you say Getty/Istock, but there is a difference. Did we (assuming this could even be relevant to me, I'm not sure yet) get paid for this, either through Getty or Istock? What are the Terms of use? I have way more questions about this deal, until I understand it I'm not going to get upset.
Fine, so if you wanna know all the details, just go and check it out yourself:
http://www.1und1.de (http://www.1und1.de)
http://www.1and1.com (http://www.1and1.com)
http://www.1and1.co.uk/ (http://www.1and1.co.uk/)
Choose depending on your location. I guess thereīs a free trial. Enjoy.
I know and saw that they give away my and the pictures of many other photographers (some exclusive) away for free, enough for me to get upset.
-
'
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
I can't tell what's going on in the OP, it's in German and doesn't clearly link to the images or TOS or anything I can make out. Sean's links are different and don't look so bad, they are different than the google deal.
You can see everything in the pictures I attached. Itīs pretty simple: You search for a photo for example "baby" and you get a selection of Istock photos for free use on your personal or commerical website.
Without having access to it, I can't tell if those files are Istock or Getty. Do they come from certain contributors or from all files? Is there a TOS page?
Just read my post, or is the web access down at your place? (addition I also found one of my pictures, and Iīm exclusive)
Problem with this deal: The TOS Page is hard to find or non existing ...
Are you some kind of an exiled village idiot of Istock? 8) ... or maybe you just find pleasure in humiliating yourself.
-
Looks like too much for me to do, maybe someone else will try it out and get some info. I wouldn't be surprised if Sean was already on it.
ETA: I'm not sure what to make of 3 negatives for this. I'm not going to take the time to create and account and then cancel it with some company I've never heard of.
Itīs for your critical thinking and brave behaviour.
-
'
-
'
-
Looks like too much for me to do, maybe someone else will try it out and get some info. I wouldn't be surprised if Sean was already on it.
ETA: I'm not sure what to make of 3 negatives for this. I'm not going to take the time to create and account and then cancel it with some company I've never heard of.
Itīs for your critical thinking and brave behaviour.
I'll let someone else give their information to that company. I don't think I'll be sending out my credit card info to get to the bottom of this.
quelle surprise. something tells me, you donīt want to get to the bottom.
-
Typical, always defending IS, it is never their fault, is it?
I can't tell what's going on in the OP, it's in German and doesn't clearly link to the images or TOS or anything I can make out. Sean's links are different and don't look so bad, they are different than the google deal.
You can see everything in the pictures I attached. Itīs pretty simple: You search for a photo for example "baby" and you get a selection of Istock photos for free use on your personal or commerical website.
Without having access to it, I can't tell if those files are Istock or Getty. Do they come from certain contributors or from all files? Is there a TOS page?
Just read my post, or is the web access down at your place? (addition I also found one of my pictures, and Iīm exclusive)
Problem with this deal: The TOS Page is hard to find or non existing ...
Are you some kind of an exiled village idiot of Istock? 8) ... or maybe you just find pleasure in humiliating yourself.
I guess you are talking to me, even though you are replying to someone else. I'm not sure I've insulted anyone here, sorry for asking questions I guess it's better to just assume what we want to hear rather than get the truth. I'd say that attitude is more befitting of the village idiot but what do I know?
well, you did recognize yourself despite the 'wrong' quoting didn't, you? 8) Thanks dude, this worked like a charm.
-
'
-
'
-
And then he said to do the work yourself. But you dont want to, so why expect someone else do your digging? No need to answer, I already know whats coming.
I did ask you a few questions, none of which you answered.
-
Looks like too much for me to do, maybe someone else will try it out and get some info. I wouldn't be surprised if Sean was already on it.
ETA: I'm not sure what to make of 3 negatives for this. I'm not going to take the time to create and account and then cancel it with some company I've never heard of.
Itīs for your critical thinking and brave behaviour.
I'll let someone else give their information to that company. I don't think I'll be sending out my credit card info to get to the bottom of this.
quelle surprise. something tells me, you donīt want to get to the bottom.
I did ask you a few questions, none of which you answered.
I donīt like to get trolled. Again, if you wanna see yourself just go their site and check it out yourself. Just use the Istock company credit card.
I told all the FACTS I know.
-
Looks like too much for me to do, maybe someone else will try it out and get some info. I wouldn't be surprised if Sean was already on it.
ETA: I'm not sure what to make of 3 4 negatives for this. I'm not going to take the time to create and account and then cancel it with some company I've never heard of.
How about posting details on the Istock forum and asking for an explanation of exactly what is going on, if you haven't already done that?
"I don't understand anything so I think people shouldn't suggest anything might be wrong" is a pretty poor way to pursue one's business affairs. Ostrich, sand, head, etc.
-
'
-
Also is the deal only good for paying customers from Germany? That would be a big difference from the Google deal in itself without even knowing what the terms are.
Why not check with iS what the terms are and let us know?
As they are offering 25000 pics for free, but promoting the paid collection, that looks as though the 25000 would be within the 'no compensation' clause 3b in the EASA I quoted above.
We need to be told, otherwise a provider of one of the 25000 might find an in use that they thought hadn't been licensed and try to deal with it.
As for ToS, very few people read/adhere to them (going by the number of editorial images I've found in commercial use), and IME iS is usually fairly reluctant to do any more than send an initial email.
Great, you KNOW all 25,000 files are directly from Istock. I didn't realize that was a fact as of yet.
That's for sure what they want us to take from this page:
http://www.1and1.co.uk/details-istockphoto (http://www.1and1.co.uk/details-istockphoto)
The statement that "The prices of the images in the image library start at Ģ1 for unlimited use." is unequivocal, and untrue, according to the licence options linked to from one of my images.
-
'
-
Looks like too much for me to do, maybe someone else will try it out and get some info. I wouldn't be surprised if Sean was already on it.
ETA: I'm not sure what to make of 3 4 negatives for this. I'm not going to take the time to create and account and then cancel it with some company I've never heard of.
How about posting details on the Istock forum and asking for an explanation of exactly what is going on, if you haven't already done that?
"I don't understand anything so I think people shouldn't suggest anything might be wrong" is a pretty poor way to pursue one's business affairs. Ostrich, sand, head, etc.
I'm not even sure this is an Istock issue yet. From what I've seen so far the website just says an agency and 25,000 images with no reference to Istock or Getty, you may be able to infer that it's Istock from the other promotions they are doing but it's still not 100%, it could be just Getty images for all I know. The OP said he found his image from Istock on there, I can't tell that any of those images came from Istock myself. I'm not going to post a question like "some anonymous guy said he found his image on a website for free, what's up with that?".
Fair enough. You need to know the answers before it is worth asking any questions, at which point there's nothing left but a woo-yay. I understand.
-
'
-
'
-
I know for sure Fotolia has or had partnered with 1&1 as early as 2006 or 2007 because I was involved with both.
-
The statement that "The prices of the images in the image library start at Ģ1 for unlimited use." is unequivocal, and untrue, according to the licence options linked to from one of my images.
I agree that it is wrong according to the license but look up the page and you'll see "Unlimited use for your website", I think this is what was meant (although even that is unclear).
[/quote]
"I think that's what was meant" has no real meaning. iStock know that and that's why all their contracts are obfuscatory.
However, "images ... start at Ģ1 for unlimited use" in law would be taken at face value, and is false advertising, at least in the UK - and that was the 1+1 UK page.
The buck on that presumably lies with 1&1, unless they could prove that the wording was approved by iS.
-
'
-
'
-
5 Free Images
1. Create an account - free of charge and with no obligation to purchase
2. Log in.
3. Download your 5 free images.
20% Discount
To be able to download iStock files you need purchase Credits, which act as the iStock currency. Simply enter in the code 1AND1 at the point of purchase to receive your discount.
Here you find more information, how to download files
Thanks for signing on to iStockphoto.com and becoming part of the most vibrant, creative communities in the world. You can now download 5 out of the 98 files. Simply click on the thumbnail image and accept the license.
Who pays the 20 percent discount and who pays the 5 free images?
-
'
-
Istock pays $1 per credit normally for free images,
Do you KNOW that for sure, since the moderator (Rob) neither found a recent statement that it is still so, nor did he return to the thread with current information.
The current ASA clause 3b says that iS doesn't have to pay compensation for these promotional images. They may well do so, but it's unlikely for them to pay for something we have been forced so sign that they don't need to.
I know that MichaelJay, who used to be an iStock employee, mentioned the $1 payment on here a couple of weeks ago, which was the first I heard of it, though he admitted he didn't know that that was still applied.
I can't find anything on iS that mentions the $1, but maybe you can.
-
'
-
Istock pays $1 per credit normally for free images,
Do you KNOW that for sure, since the moderator (Rob) neither found a recent statement that it is still so, nor did he return to the thread with current information.
The current ASA clause 3b says that iS doesn't have to pay compensation for these promotional images. They may well do so, but it's unlikely for them to pay for something we have been forced so sign that they don't need to.
I know that MichaelJay, who used to be an iStock employee, mentioned the $1 payment on here a couple of weeks ago, which was the first I heard of it, though he admitted he didn't know that that was still applied.
I can't find anything on iS that mentions the $1, but maybe you can.
I'd have to go back and look for it just like you would. I remember that being the case last time I saw it brought up, I haven't seen anything that would lead me to think that's been changed. We would get $0 downloads I guess if they had changed it right?
Or they wouldn't report it, as there wasn't a 'sale'.
-
'
-
Mouse over the image tools and galleries tab: http://business.hibu.com/products/websites/basic/ (http://business.hibu.com/products/websites/basic/)
http://www.moonfruit.com/partners
(http://www.moonfruit.com/partners)
Many bad deals!
-
I asked the question in the IS forum but no one seems to care. I guess its not a big bad deal. They are all congratulating Lobo for his birthday :D
-
I asked the question in the IS forum but no one seems to care. I guess its not a big bad deal. They are all congratulating Lobo for his birthday :D
I noticed that. Uriah Heep lives.
-
I don't see it anywhere in the thread and there is no link.
It is in the link Sean gave [url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url] ([url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url]) which is by means of being an advert for iStockphoto.
"What is iStockphoto?
The iStockphoto library offers you more than 5 million images for easy and hassle-free integration into your website. The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use. Images are organized by category, and also discoverable via an image search."
So - what sort of stretching of the truth is that? - iStock normal licenses do not allow unlimited use. As I have worked out that my personal lowest credit value for a non-sub sale was 42c, I don't think that could buy even the lowest value EL, far less an all-encompassing EL allowing 'unlimited' use.
Thanks ShadySue. From that link it looks like it means "Unlimited use for your website", they should probably change the wording. Maybe contact support and let them know it's not written very clearly on the promotion.
Ooops I missed this post and I already contacted them and asked about it. I guess we just have to wait a few days and I might get a reply.
Or maybe Ron's question in the Discussion forum will be answered sooner. Hopefully.
-
'
-
I didnt, you need to stop accusing me dude. I only vote you down when you are being a troll and when I disagree with you.
-
'
-
I didnt, you need to stop accusing me dude. I only vote you down when you are being a troll and when I disagree with you.
Lol, there's only one.
One troll? Yes, you. I can add another vote down to prove it wasnt me.
-
'
-
Maybe an answer?
From MichaelJay using Google translate:
"For each image used was / is purchased an Extended License for Electronic templates. Since this deal by 1 & 1 is a very large customer of ours, we have of course given them a greater discount. Nevertheless, every photographer should get more money than it would correspond to approximately 30 individual sales for Webgrößen. Since the selection is quite large in images, the images should not show up on many more websites. As a photographer and a member of this before I find a good deal."
That was a post from 2010, and perhaps that is still the arrangement; but I think the new agreement which we had to agree to to make our files free for iS promotions came after that. I'm pretty sure it was after the RCs which was Sept 2010; Michael's post was a month before that.
Of course, it may be that Michael's information is still the case, in which case, probably fair enough.
NB, my CR ticket is about the 'unlimited use' phrasing. It's true that you have to agree to the terms, but it's a long scroll of dense legalese - who is going to read it? It says on the ad that you get unlimited use - why would a normal person, especially in the UK where we are very strict about truth in advertising, imagine that the T&C would say anything else?
Last week I was signing up to or for something, and I had to agree to the T&C (maybe it was wordpress, maybe something else) and down the left hand side there was dense legalese and on the right hand side there was a Plain English version which they said was legally valid, meaning the dense legalese couldn't be manipulated to contradict the Plain English version.
Honestly, I was banging on about Plain English versions of the ASAs and licence agreements almost as soon as I started iStock and got no backup. There are loads of contributors and buyers whose first language isn't any of the iS languages; and even for those who have more-or-less English as a mother tongue, Canadian legalese is not our normal vernacular.
-
OK, the announcement of the renoval of our choice whether to opt in or out of the free images for promotion scheme was made on August 29th 2011, so over a year after Michael's post referenced above.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=333754&messageid=6468072 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=333754&messageid=6468072)
On the page linked to from 'overview', it says, inter alia:
"Promotional Use
You will no longer be able to opt-out of the Promotional Use provision of the ASAs, which allows us to use our contributors content for marketing and promotional purposes without compensation. We use your images, video, flash, audio and illustrations to promote the site, bring in traffic, drive people to portfolios, and ultimately sell more content. Wherever possible, iStock will provide attribution for all files used. We want to be able to showcase the best of iStockphoto, including your files."
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1165 (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1165)
The current situation is anyone's guess.
-
'
-
Of course, it may be that Michael's information is still the case, in which case, probably fair enough.
He's still around, maybe someone who knows him can ask him about it.
He posts here, but he no longer works for iStock.
-
Well, if it is still that deal, then indeed an extended license was bought that should be in a range that is similar to 30 websize sales. And he also presumes because it is a large group of images the individual files won't be "overused".
This would be a regular deal.
I thought it is something new and unpaid for like with Microsoft.
But why are the names lf the artists missing?
-
Well, if it is still that deal, then indeed an extended license was bought that should be in a range that is similar to 30 websize sales. And he also presumes because it is a large group of images the individual files won't be "overused".
This would be a regular deal.
I thought it is something new and unpaid for like with Microsoft.
But why are the names lf the artists missing?
On the 90+ images on the UK site, the artists names are there, so you must be talking about the 25,000 on the German site?
-
Not impressed, as usual, by Lobo's sarcastic tone and his totally inadequate answer:
"...a BD deal from 2010. The UNLIMITED USE ... is actually LIMITED to the fixed template sites."
What is BD?
Why does he say 'from 2010' though it is on their website right now?
How is anyone supposed to know that 'unlimited use' means "limited to the fixed template sites".
The ASA doesn't play, "guess what the advertiser was thinking".
Ow, pity you didn't ask about what contributors get paid for the free downloads. It would be good to get that cleared up.
-
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=355342&messageid=6921332 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=355342&messageid=6921332)
Posted By SemmickPhoto:
The prices of the images in the image library start at $1 for unlimited use
Posted By Lodo:
Hrmm, it's always interesting when a contributor with 32 files and 10 downloads is doing the best to try and stoke outrage over a BD deal from 2010.
The UNLIMITED USE you continue to point out is actually LIMITED to the fixed template sites.
-
I've lost the page where I could look through the 98 pics available for choosing on the UK site. However, I did notice one of those available was from ooyoo, whose work I generally admire a lot. I just checked and ooyoo is diamond, not Black Diamond, so BD must mean something different.
http://www.istockphoto.com/imageoffer.php?lpid=iw2010&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/imageoffer.php?lpid=iw2010&page=1)
fotosipsak is also a diamond.
-
OK, so now it's being posited that BD means business development.
Fair enough, but it's not a well enough used phrase to warrant an abbreviation that everyone might understand.
This from the same person who replied to this comment (on the exclusive forum [no link] in a thread about the long-promised mirroring of E+ content being 'unreliable):
"Once again, some contributors continue to benefit from having most, or all of their files moved to Getty, while the rest of us wait and wait and wait..."
with this comment (presumably disingenuous and not sheer stupidity):
"What are you talking about?"
When the context of this and a previous very long thread on the same topic was about how some people have had most of their eligible content transferred, while others have almost none.
-
Free usage for users should require an extended license for electronic resale (templates, etc.). But of course, they likely offered them a great deal for a "small" collection for the "publicity". To draw people in with things like this (which do not mention any free images):
[url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url] ([url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url])
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/1and1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/1and1[/url])
[url]http://faq.1and1.co.uk/website_building/1.html[/url] ([url]http://faq.1and1.co.uk/website_building/1.html[/url])
i think last month i've seen the same with GoDaddy and their SiteBuilder.
i guess they fit the bill as "bulk deals" so agencies give them complete freedom about usage.
-
Free usage for users should require an extended license for electronic resale (templates, etc.). But of course, they likely offered them a great deal for a "small" collection for the "publicity". To draw people in with things like this (which do not mention any free images):
[url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url] ([url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url])
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/1and1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/1and1[/url])
[url]http://faq.1and1.co.uk/website_building/1.html[/url] ([url]http://faq.1and1.co.uk/website_building/1.html[/url])
i think last month i've seen the same with GoDaddy and their SiteBuilder.
i guess they fit the bill as "bulk deals" so agencies give them complete freedom about usage.
According to the Lobo its limited use and not complete freedom
-
According to the Lobo its limited use and not complete freedom
That may be what Lobo thinks, but it's not what it says on the page, so not 'honest' or 'truthful', as there are no conditions attached to the 'unlimited', so it's a form of bait-and-switch.
-
Clearly nobody is interested in the details of the deal, they accept the Lobo's answer.
Nobody asked the question in the IS forum, I did, and there you have it; Its not a bad deal, its all good. Case closed.
And if the case is not closed, I suggest people start asking questions in the thread I started on the IS forum.
-
'
-
According to the Lobo its limited use and not complete freedom
That may be what Lobo thinks, but it's not what it says on the page, so not 'honest' or 'truthful', as there are no conditions attached to the 'unlimited', so it's a form of bait-and-switch.
It only says unlimited on the 1and1 website, the same promotion from Istock doesn't say that at all and each image that gets downloaded can only be done after agreeing to the terms. It looks to me like it's 1and1 promoting something that it really can't and the fault is with their promotion.
Absolutely, but why doesnt the Lobo give me that answer instead of being a dickhole?
-
According to the Lobo its limited use and not complete freedom
That may be what Lobo thinks, but it's not what it says on the page, so not 'honest' or 'truthful', as there are no conditions attached to the 'unlimited', so it's a form of bait-and-switch.
It only says unlimited on the 1and1 website, the same promotion from Istock doesn't say that at all and each image that gets downloaded can only be done after agreeing to the terms. It looks to me like it's 1and1 promoting something that it really can't and the fault is with their promotion.
According to Lobo, that deal has been going on since 2010. You'd think iStock might have asked them to change their wording by now. We know that iStock can't keep to any sort of given timescale [1], but three years should be plenty time to get their partner to tell the truth. If they actually care.
And as for Lobo's 'word':
LLMillerMedia:
"Lobo, as far as updates on new features are concerned, (as mentioned above) when does the next newsletter come out?"
Lobo:
"I should have something together for before the end of the July. That said, some features will be launched before hand. ..."
Krakozawr (yesterday):
"The end of the July is tomorrow, right? :)"
Lobo:
"It's looking more likely to be early August."
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=354349&messageid=6921780 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=354349&messageid=6921780)
Tous les jours, il dit la męme chose; and most of it, you'd better not believe.
-
'
-
'
-
Amnd I haven't heard from CR (yet) regarding the 'unlimited' wording.
-
the guy is a complete tool.
THE LOBO: Oh please. If you actually spent more time uploading content and less time finding a reason to point out how I was hurting feelings you might have more than 37 files uploaded since May 2012. If you are here to just opine on the state of the industry without actually participating in it you can expect I will provide feedback reflective of your investment.
We spend a lot of time responding to the folks who only come in here to troll. It's part of the risks in having public forums, but it's not exactly a new environment.
-
According to the Lobo its limited use and not complete freedom
That may be what Lobo thinks, but it's not what it says on the page, so not 'honest' or 'truthful', as there are no conditions attached to the 'unlimited', so it's a form of bait-and-switch.
It only says unlimited on the 1and1 website, the same promotion from Istock doesn't say that at all and each image that gets downloaded can only be done after agreeing to the terms. It looks to me like it's 1and1 promoting something that it really can't and the fault is with their promotion.
Absolutely, but why doesnt the Lobo give me that answer instead of being a dickhole?
his job ain't helping contributors or moderating the forums but to upset the most people possible, curious that he believes he is one funny fu-cker bashing contributors
-
Forgive me if I'm getting confused, but I see two things going on here:
1. On the German site, you are able to easily browse and insert a 1&1 hosted collection of images to place onto your site.
2. The English pages are a promotion to encourage you to open an account and get 5 free images from the regular iStock collection, like a normal customer.
Am I incorrect?
-
'
-
@ tickstock:
It's relevant on two counts:
If 1&1 are a 'partner' of iStock and are making what Lobo says is a false promise, in their UK site, which is illegal in the UK where adverts must be Legal, decent, honest and truthful; and if as Lobo says, this deal has been going since 2010; wouldn't you think that iS, as their partner, would be asking them to correct their misleading statement?
Can we trust what Lobo says, given evidence over the years of which this is only the most recent example. "They" don't seem to give him accurate information
to pass on, or maybe they deliberately give him misleading information to pass on.
-
Forgive me if I'm getting confused, but I see two things going on here:
1. On the German site, you are able to easily browse and insert a 1&1 hosted collection of images to place onto your site.
2. The English pages are a promotion to encourage you to open an account and get 5 free images from the regular iStock collection, like a normal customer.
Am I incorrect?
As far as I know you're correct, except that it's a UK site, not an English one.
There also seems to be a confusion as to what contributors get paid for the free giveaways. Some seem to think it's $1 per download, while the ASA says it's 0.
-
'
-
@ tickstock:
It's relevant on two counts:
If 1&1 are a 'partner' of iStock and are making what Lobo says is a false promise, in their UK site, which is illegal in the UK where adverts must be Legal, decent, honest and truthful; and if as Lobo says, this deal has been going since 2010; wouldn't you think that iS, as their partner, would be asking them to correct their misleading statement?
Can we trust what Lobo says, given evidence over the years of which this is only the most recent example. "They" don't seem to give him accurate information
to pass on, or maybe they deliberately give him misleading information to pass on.
I missed that part, I just saw your thing about his "word". Maybe no one has brought up the issue with "unlimited" to the right people, I have no idea how that works or maybe Istock told 1and1 but they decided they didn't want to change it? I've said it a bunch of times now but in order to get those images, each time you need to click on agree to the terms, they pop up full screen.
And I've said that that's a bait and switch, which is illegal in the UK, and it's on 1&1's uk site.
Who ever reads the terms? How could it be policed, given that the photos on offer are all high sellers, so it's not as though someone would see it in a magazine and get suspicious.
So in your hypothesis, in 2010 iS and 1&1 got into a partnership. 1&1 chose the 'unlimited' wording, iS asked them to change the wording, 1&1 refused, yet the deal is still in place.
I don't think that's any better than any other scenario, e.g. iStock not actually checking what their 'partners' do.
-
'
-
I think we need to get away from the promotion on this site:
http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto (http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto)
They run this kind of thing with other people. It's just an ad for 5 free "images" from a promotional collection of 98 images.
What's more concerning is what is on the German site, and that is what we should figure out. Sorry I posted the English links here - it seems to have messed things up.
-
the guy is a complete tool.
THE LOBO: Oh please. If you actually spent more time uploading content and less time finding a reason to point out how I was hurting feelings you might have more than 37 files uploaded since May 2012. If you are here to just opine on the state of the industry without actually participating in it you can expect I will provide feedback reflective of your investment.
We spend a lot of time responding to the folks who only come in here to troll. It's part of the risks in having public forums, but it's not exactly a new environment.
I think Lobo is both correct and positively restrained in his remarks. Why have you come over to MSG to call him a 'tool' when you could have done it on the IS forum or privately via sitemail?
It's a complete mystery to me as to why you 'invest' so much of your time on this and other issues that mostly do not affect you at all.
-
'
-
the guy is a complete tool.
THE LOBO: Oh please. If you actually spent more time uploading content and less time finding a reason to point out how I was hurting feelings you might have more than 37 files uploaded since May 2012. If you are here to just opine on the state of the industry without actually participating in it you can expect I will provide feedback reflective of your investment.
We spend a lot of time responding to the folks who only come in here to troll. It's part of the risks in having public forums, but it's not exactly a new environment.
I think Lobo is both correct and positively restrained in his remarks. Why have you come over to MSG to call him a 'tool' when you could have done it on the IS forum or privately via sitemail?
It's a complete mystery to me as you why you 'invest' so much of your time on this and other issues that mostly do not affect you at all.
Lobo, is that you?
Because no one here wanted to ask IS. And why would I get myself banned from the IS forum? I told him I reported him.
Cheers dude.
-
What's more concerning is what is on the German site, and that is what we should figure out. Sorry I posted the English links here - it seems to have messed things up.
Sean, I realise you're geographically challenged, but if you don't sort out the difference between England and the UK, I'll be forced to give you a glesga kiss: http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glesga_kiss/What%20is%20a%20Glesga%20Kiss.htm (http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glesga_kiss/What%20is%20a%20Glesga%20Kiss.htm)
-
'
-
I think we need to get away from the promotion on this site:
[url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url] ([url]http://www.1and1.com/details-istockphoto[/url])
They run this kind of thing with other people. It's just an ad for 5 free "images" from a promotional collection of 98 images.
What's more concerning is what is on the German site, and that is what we should figure out. Sorry I posted the English links here - it seems to have messed things up.
Yep that's true, the promo stuff is different.
[url]http://website.1and1.com/pricing?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose[/url] ([url]http://website.1and1.com/pricing?linkOrigin=&linkId=ct.txt.allinclusive-link#choose[/url]) It's on the US site as well.
There we go:
"Over 25,000 professional images are available for your website at no extra charge. The keyword search makes it easy for you to quickly find the image you are looking for. If you can't find what you are looking for, you will also have access to more than 5 million agency quality images (at an extra cost). "
-
What's more concerning is what is on the German site, and that is what we should figure out. Sorry I posted the English links here - it seems to have messed things up.
Sean, I realise you're geographically challenged, but if you don't sort out the difference between England and the UK, I'll be forced to give you a glesga kiss: [url]http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glesga_kiss/What%20is%20a%20Glesga%20Kiss.htm[/url] ([url]http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glesga_kiss/What%20is%20a%20Glesga%20Kiss.htm[/url])
English language
Yeah, that. Like a Canadian site is "English" as well for purposes of discussion :)
-
'
-
Well it was inevitable, but I got banned. LOL. I am sure he banned me for what I said over here, but here he is only the Pieman, over there he has power.
-
Well it was inevitable, but I got banned. LOL. I am sure he banned me for what I said over here, but here he is only the Pieman, over there he has power.
you got banned because of that? just unbelievable, what you did wasn't trolling, you entered a well structured topic regarding a serious matter without attacking anybody, you were just asking for an explanation, I believe that Lobo is now setting new goals for iStock because the important ones are impossible to reach, pathetic bully
-
Well it was inevitable, but I got banned. LOL. I am sure he banned me for what I said over here, but here he is only the Pieman, over there he has power.
He clearly wanted to ban you and was determined to goad you until you reacted. The FIRST thing he said, rather than try to find an accurate answer to your question, was a reference to your port, which was totally irrelevant to the question.
He can't stand people who ask 'awkward' questions.
Anyway, I've got a fair-sized port and average sales, and CR haven't got back to me with an answer.
And what was his stupid comment about, "If you actually spent more time uploading content ..." when almost everyone is finding that it's been pointless uploading for months as your files just go into best match limbo, then disappear forever. Check out even BD and D ports and you'll see the same (where they've been uploading recently). Of course, if he was a contributor or actually read what people said he'd know that was the case, and effectively has been since September.
-
I dont care, I had only like 5 comments there and wasnt going to add a lot more anyway. The forum is useless with that troll roaming around, Ive never found it a nice warm place to be. Its beyond me me why he still has so many people svcking his @ss.