MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: ShadySue on December 24, 2013, 13:21
-
Getty refunds, from as far back as July, without informatory emails:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358364&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358364&page=1)
-
A true Getty Christmas...
-
55 dollars gone. I know my pp was too good to be true last month!
-
Kinda like getting a lump of coal in your Christmas stocking.
I don't seem to have lost anything. I am guessing this only affects people who have sales on Getty Images proper, rather than through the PP?
My sympathies to those affected...
-
Thanks for pointing this out Sue. Imagine if they had started the PP payout and the script for the Getty refunds were running at the same time! ;)
-
Kinda like getting a lump of coal in your Christmas stocking.
I don't seem to have lost anything. I am guessing this only affects people who have sales on Getty Images proper, rather than through the PP?
My sympathies to those affected...
At least with coal I'd get something not refund loss from IS.
-
Refunds are refunds. Stuff happens. But to yank $ out of accounts without an accompanying explanation is inexcusable. The impersonal corporate approach raises its ugly head once again.
-
I guess it shows sometimes people work hard on christmas eve...
Sorry for all those affected. The timing is incredible.
But for me it is a reminder why I feel safer as indie. Even if one agency does this to you it is unlikely they will all do something really stupid at the same time.
-
I guess it shows sometimes people work hard on christmas eve...
Yup, to claw back money; but not to pay out PP.
I'm not affected by either (so far), but commiserations to those who are. They've managed to be even-handed about p*ssing off both indies and exclusives.
-
Refunds are refunds. Stuff happens. But to yank $ out of accounts without an accompanying explanation is inexcusable. The impersonal corporate approach raises its ugly head once again.
Yes, an the sky is the sky, the cheese is a cheese, etc. These frauds should ALWAYS be payed by the stock site and/or the payment service provider / bank + pay remedy for the copyright holders, whos' work they failed to protect.... or was it something wrong with the picture we uploaded that allowed a the fraud? Did we put a backdoor into the JPG with our photoshop settings or what?
Can't secure your store properly? FU pay me. Can't properly secure your clients financial data? FU pay me. Can't operate your payment system properly? FU pay me. It's all your duty, not ours.
-
Who said it's fraud?
-
Who said it's fraud?
That's even worse.
-
Who said it's fraud?
That's even worse.
Lobo is assuming they're refunds. In the past, they came out just before new GI payments went in, but it seems this is a backlog of several months, someone has now mentioned June.
-
Who said it's fraud?
That's even worse.
Lobo is assuming they're refunds. In the past, they came out just before new GI payments went in, but it seems this is a backlog of several months, someone has now mentioned June.
"assuming"? :) So basically, they can just steal your money with whatever reason they care to come up with. If it's card fraud, you at least have a third / fourth party to confirm some 'justification' - that's what I ment by "that's even worse", maybe in a bit too compressed manner. I'm a bit saddened, because this shouldn't need further explanation, unless people wholeheartedly trust getty (or lobo) of course
-
The topic header should've said a 'a Christmas kick in the stones'
-
Hmmm, I fully agree with Topol here.
-
Getty should have waited until tomorrow (26 Dec.). Day after Christmas. That's national return day.