You really need to quote to us exactly what she said, and maybe exactly what you said when you contacted CR.
It could be that what she said has got lost in translation, or maybe you're inferring something that wasn't implied.

@shady Sue
This thread is not about an rejection issue.
The rejection was just the former conversation with Misses N.
So please leave your remarks to therejections and contribute to the actual topic.
thanx

You said her response, digging into your identity, was a reply to a critique you'd written to her about a rejection you'd had.
From your OP: It started with one of these weird rejections you normaly get only with little agencies ... I answered with a critique and suddenly Misses N. found some "Issues" in my profile.
Now you are talking about another conversation which we know nothing about.

It's impossible to make any sense out of your complaint: you keep changing the goalposts, and you won't give us all the information we need to offer an informed opinion about your situation.

I wrote it down as much correct than i can and i did not twist any facts but i heard that Istock becomes very funny when you quote mails and i dont want to have contact with lawyers.

But if they really go further with their funny games I think about hiring an lawyer.
Not because i need these handfull of dollars (shutterstock sells ten times better and stockearnings are only to finance the journeys of my apprentices)  - just because i am a fan of justice and i dont like it if people behave like "little-bonaparte".

Throw your money at a lawyer if you like.
I think you'll find, as Sean did  , that they can kick you out at will, without needing any legal reason or actual breach of contract.

.

.

.

Another Thread gone bad 

Quote from: ShadySue on April 24, 2013, 16:45

Maybe if I were clairvoyant, but I'm not; and for that reason, I'm out.

Reading words would  be enough in that case.

I think Liz said a few times your post is impossible to understand - you've not given any real details. I agree, as do the others who have read and not commented here.
Getting shirty at members here won't help.
I've no idea what your issue is apart from 'something happened, and you said something to iS and they said something back that you think is a threat'. aargh, it's like having a conversation with my 8 year old!
i think you should do... something. can't be any clearer than that, can i?

suggest you have a cup of tea and write a calm, polite response to iS, stating the facts as you see them and asking for clarification, and hopefully this will be sorted.

Hi everybody,
i just experience a very interesting encounter with Misses K. N. from Istock.
It started with one of these weird rejections you normaly get only with little agencies (MR for a flower-bouquet or PR for a governmental building etc...).
I answered with a critique and suddenly Misses N. found some "Issues" in my profile and now it seems like she is searching desperate for a reason to get me kicked out .
And it seems like she tries that in a way that noboy can say its censorship against photographers who are not willing to shut up with every thing they do.

She digged very deep for a reason and now they suspect me that i  upload images which are not mine.
Of course i only upload images which are made by myself.

They come across with the argument that with companys (i run a company - but that does not mean necessarily that i upload images as a company) it might be a bit tricky.
Quote Istock:
"Since iStockphoto is really set up to deal with single photographers, it
is a bit tricky to work with a company that may employ several
photographers or artists."

I answered:
"-All required fields in the profile-section of your backend are filled out.
-I dont hire other photographers.
-All images are made by myself. "

If i am right with my "feeling" its one of the most unserious behaviors i encountered in 35 years of businesslife.
I really hope that this is just a severe misunderstanding and to clearify that i invite Misses K.N to give her statement here.
regards axel Lauer.
www.axellauer.de

I got one photo rejected for MR, however there is no people inside the image. werid.

I have to jump in and remind a few people here that iStock is not some cuddly toy that just loves everyone back either.

First, I don't encourage disrespectful treatment of agencies but most (!) of us have expressed clearly our dislike towards iStock in the past.

Axel, doing business from Germany, who IS most likely German, is nonetheless still dealing with a language and cultural barrier. How do I know? I'm German and I'm working in microstock for over 8 years now from the US.

Despite trying to understand different business practices it is sometimes unexplainable how some decisions by certain agencies are made. In any situation, misunderstandings can be the cause.

I get the feeling that Axel did not accurately state the issue at hand, which is not something he did intentionally in order to confuse anyone.

I can see how utterly frustrating it is to fight for image approvals that simply do not require MRs - ALTHOUGH this is at the discretion of the agency!

I believe Axel has had such issues in the past regarding MRs or PRs for images that are quite generic and I can see that it is aggravating, especially if these kinds of images are your bread and butter.

So here is what I see is happening (I hope this is correct and probably helpful for others to understand):

- Axel uploads an image to IS which gets rejected due to a missing MR/PR.

- Axel contacts the same person he has been dealing with at IS previously. That's something I do as well if I have a contact at an agency who helped me before - to speed things up.

- During the conversation between Axel and his contact at IS, apparently Axel argued why he requires a release for that specific image "providing" critique to IS, which we all know can be quite "unhealthy" in terms of continuing a working relationship with IS.

- Since the issue about the MR/PR was somewhat negligible, IS got ticked off and is now trying to find irregularities in his account in order to get him booted (Axel's words - NOT mine!).

- This lead to the communication about whether he is uploading content that may not be his as he is running a business in Germany employing other photographers.

- IS is inclined to assume that Axel is uploading content that is not only his work, which most likely can only be legally "contained" by having Axel fill out a PR that explicitly states it is all his work OR asking the photographers he is working with, if any of the content belongs to them (which is unfeasible).

- So in the end Axel feels discriminated against because, despite uploading as an individual to IS, IS now assumes he is uploading other people's work.

I hope that this is a rough run down of the issue. I may very well be missing points.

But still, as we all have signed contracts with our agents, I don't understand why some agents still treat us like garbage. If IS is sooooo concerned about the legal implications of Axel uploading other people's content why don't they just sue him then? No, instead, they give him the runaround.

It does go without saying however, that he is free to leave IS any given time.

I just want to point out that it happened to me as well in the past where I was treated like a criminal by several agencies and it took an awful lot (and lots of time) to sort things out.

It's a very uncomfortable feeling, knowing you haven't done anything wrong and being accused of something.

If I got facts wrong, please disregard this message. 

Take it easy fellas.