pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: D-Day (Deactivation Day) on Istock - Feb 2  (Read 131259 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #775 on: February 01, 2013, 11:05 »
+9
They've had plenty of time to make a serious response to the contributor kickback.  They've now turned on the fog machines and are teasing some sort of announcement for next week, because they want to blunt the impact of the bad publicity generated by D-Day by spreading out the deactivations.   The hope is that many contributors will at least delay pulling out for another week in hopes of some miracle; that will reduce the raw number of deactivations on D-Day itself, which is the only thing the trade press might report.


« Reply #776 on: February 01, 2013, 11:12 »
+4
Let's do it.
Quoting the Generals in "The Longest Day" 24h before D-Day :  Gentlemen, it's on.  Next stop Normandy.
Good Luck.  Pity we don't have 4000 ships and 11000 planes ...

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #777 on: February 01, 2013, 11:20 »
0
I have a question.  If you're independent, can IS still include your photos in the Google Giveaway?  And if they do and you have those files at another agency, wouldn't agency #2 have a huge problem with that?
Apparently some independent contributors files are included in the Google deal but being independent means that other agencies don't get to have a problem with what you do elsewhere.
Yes, I'm the one with 2 images on GD and I'm independent. So, no protection for both!

« Reply #778 on: February 01, 2013, 11:23 »
0
They've had plenty of time to make a serious response to the contributor kickback.  They've now turned on the fog machines and are teasing some sort of announcement for next week, because they want to blunt the impact of the bad publicity generated by D-Day by spreading out the deactivations.   The hope is that many contributors will at least delay pulling out for another week in hopes of some miracle; that will reduce the raw number of deactivations on D-Day itself, which is the only thing the trade press might report.


You nailed it. Sadly, people keep falling for it.  :(

lisafx

« Reply #779 on: February 01, 2013, 11:24 »
+10
They've had plenty of time to make a serious response to the contributor kickback.  They've now turned on the fog machines and are teasing some sort of announcement for next week, because they want to blunt the impact of the bad publicity generated by D-Day by spreading out the deactivations.   The hope is that many contributors will at least delay pulling out for another week in hopes of some miracle; that will reduce the raw number of deactivations on D-Day itself, which is the only thing the trade press might report.

I sincerely believe that the reason any response is delayed is because their response will be contingent on how big a response they get to D-Day.  If people who said they were going to pull images don't do it, or if there is less response than anticipated, they will NOT CHANGE ANYTHING of any significance. 
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 11:32 by lisafx »

« Reply #780 on: February 01, 2013, 11:29 »
+8
By working together we can send a strong message that they need to consider us more carefully and distribute our content responsibility. Although they are a giant, we have strong support of strength in numbers.

If we let this issue slide, whats next?

« Reply #781 on: February 01, 2013, 11:32 »
0
They've had plenty of time to make a serious response to the contributor kickback.  They've now turned on the fog machines and are teasing some sort of announcement for next week, because they want to blunt the impact of the bad publicity generated by D-Day by spreading out the deactivations.   The hope is that many contributors will at least delay pulling out for another week in hopes of some miracle; that will reduce the raw number of deactivations on D-Day itself, which is the only thing the trade press might report.

Yes, exactly right! This is precisely what I meant when I posted earlier: "I was thinking more along the lines of some kind of "cat among the pigeons" statement that might wave off people who are uncertain about participating in D-Day or those who still believe they'll offer a real solution at some point."

ETA: Unfortunately, I think it could work. :-(

Batman

« Reply #782 on: February 01, 2013, 11:42 »
+4
By working together we can send a strong message that they need to consider us more carefully and distribute our content responsibility. Although they are a giant, we have strong support of strength in numbers.

If we let this issue slide, whats next?

D-Day don't let them trick us with more empty promises. If they respected us to start with we wouldn't have the last couple years of this  rubbish. I'm deleting all but one picture.

CD123

« Reply #783 on: February 01, 2013, 11:47 »
+3
As an outsider to this I just find it so hilarious that they can ban peoples buds of their forums left right and center (up to a few hours ago still) for just speaking their minds or indicating that they are unhappy with the situation. Now, 24 hours before D-Day, a general "We value you and are working hard in protecting you! We just need more time."

Sounds feeble, sounds cheap, sounds scared and should be by all means too little too late.
But your guys images and call to make, but I hope your blades are sharp and they bleed profusely  ;)
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 12:24 by CD123 »

« Reply #784 on: February 01, 2013, 12:34 »
+1
I have a question.  If you're independent, can IS still include your photos in the Google Giveaway?  And if they do and you have those files at another agency, wouldn't agency #2 have a huge problem with that?

Apparently some independent contributors files are included in the Google deal but being independent means that other agencies don't get to have a problem with what you do elsewhere.

Yes, I'm the one with 2 images on GD and I'm independent. So, no protection for both!


Same here.  I found 2 of mine already on google drive.  I guess that makes us "one of under 100 artists" according to istock's thread.  Wow, I feel so special.  Out of my 1300+ images on there, they chose one of my top selling images, of course.  You guys can read more of my rant and feelings in my most recent blog post http://arenacreative.com/blog/photography/microstock-related/microstock-deactivation-day-planned-for-feb-2/

lisafx

« Reply #785 on: February 01, 2013, 12:49 »
0
I hope you guys who are finding your images are also contacting the people who are organizing the class action suit. 

« Reply #786 on: February 01, 2013, 12:57 »
+5
They've had plenty of time to make a serious response to the contributor kickback.  They've now turned on the fog machines and are teasing some sort of announcement for next week, because they want to blunt the impact of the bad publicity generated by D-Day by spreading out the deactivations.   The hope is that many contributors will at least delay pulling out for another week in hopes of some miracle; that will reduce the raw number of deactivations on D-Day itself, which is the only thing the trade press might report.

I sincerely believe that the reason any response is delayed is because their response will be contingent on how big a response they get to D-Day.  If people who said they were going to pull images don't do it, or if there is less response than anticipated, they will NOT CHANGE ANYTHING of any significance.

I'm borrowing Lisa's fence again (can't find the post where she posted a picture), but it's about indecisiion about getting my whole portfolio (minus a token few old images to keep the account open) off vs. just the 1,000 I pledged.

They may need some time to amend the Google deal, but they could make commitments about future deals any time - they don't need Google to help them do that. That tells me they plan to keep right on running roughshod over contributors in pursuit of cash - no opt out, no access to the details of these arrangements, no notification or inclusion of contributors in this process whatsoever.

With the Microsoft deal, they said in the first thread that they wouldn't do a deal of that sort today. They haven't even hinted that they wouldn't repeat the Google deal - the reverse in fact. They talked about new business models and new places to sell our content.

As I don't have any images on Google Drive, my worry is about more of these deals. Hanging around until they do actually scr3w me seems pretty daft to me. They've basically signalled as clearly as they can how they intend to do business going forward.

The indecision is just that it's tough to walk away.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 13:34 by jsnover »

« Reply #787 on: February 01, 2013, 13:13 »
+2
It's been weeks and they haven't even been able to issue a coherent statement.   The deal with Google isn't going to change because it's between 2 big corporations, and it would be easier to turn an aircraft carrier around. 

What we'll get next week - if anything - will be standard corporate blather about communicating more effectively in the future, our contributors are important, future deals will be evaluated in light of the feelings that  have been expressed, yada yada yada.


« Reply #788 on: February 01, 2013, 13:16 »
-11
I believe they are listening. I believe that the collective group of contributors willing to take action to protect their rights is effective. I believe we are getting somewhere.

They have indicated that they are in discussion, acknowledging that our concerns are of interest to them. That is the first step. But, a train can't stop on a dime and this is a negotiation process that will reasonably take some time.

I would like to suggest that we remain banded together, on high alert, ready to move, and visible as a concerned group to the outside world.  But, that we acknowledge their initial response with a stated postponement of D-Day for 2 weeks pending more information. If we have no satisfying details regarding a revised agreement with Getty as well as their policy on such deals in the future, then we move to deactivate. That is not evidence of a weak position, but rather of a serious party in the heat of negotiation.

« Reply #789 on: February 01, 2013, 13:17 »
+4
Quote
We are also working hard to make your content available to new customers in new uses...
I think this part of their statement says it all - time to leave.

« Reply #790 on: February 01, 2013, 13:25 »
+1
Quote
We are also working hard to make your content available to new customers in new uses...
I think this part of their statement says it all - time to leave.

Absolutely!

« Reply #791 on: February 01, 2013, 13:26 »
-7
Quote
We are also working hard to make your content available to new customers in new uses...
I think this part of their statement says it all - time to leave.

Yes, that is a scary statement. But, a stated policy about parameters for such "new uses" may resolve our concerns. Perhaps we should give them 2 weeks to produce such a policy.

SK

« Reply #792 on: February 01, 2013, 13:26 »
0
Sorry, but I couldn't wait! Over the last two days I deleted 10% of my Photo portfolio. I also tossed in my crown for video. I am prepared to go further if Feb 2nd does not produce a positive result and if sales continue the decline.

« Reply #793 on: February 01, 2013, 13:39 »
+12
...I would like to suggest that we remain banded together, on high alert, ready to move, and visible as a concerned group to the outside world.  But, that we acknowledge their initial response with a stated postponement of D-Day for 2 weeks pending more information. If we have no satisfying details regarding a revised agreement with Getty as well as their policy on such deals in the future, then we move to deactivate.

I disagree.

They aren't negotiating with us - they might be listening, but I tink the policies about future deals could be there now - they've had a couple of weeks to come up with that if they were so inclined. The Google deal might need more time to refine, but in the meantime, they're not putting anything on the table at all regarding their future actions. They couldn't even throw us a bone with a list of the images included or the planned final total. 

Postponing D-Day just means we're going to hear the same platitudes a couple of weeks from now, IMO.

« Reply #794 on: February 01, 2013, 13:51 »
+3
...I would like to suggest that we remain banded together, on high alert, ready to move, and visible as a concerned group to the outside world.  But, that we acknowledge their initial response with a stated postponement of D-Day for 2 weeks pending more information. If we have no satisfying details regarding a revised agreement with Getty as well as their policy on such deals in the future, then we move to deactivate.

I disagree.

They aren't negotiating with us - they might be listening, but I tink the policies about future deals could be there now - they've had a couple of weeks to come up with that if they were so inclined. The Google deal might need more time to refine, but in the meantime, they're not putting anything on the table at all regarding their future actions. They couldn't even throw us a bone with a list of the images included or the planned final total. 

Postponing D-Day just means we're going to hear the same platitudes a couple of weeks from now, IMO.

That's true, unfortunately. Why did they not at least give us the lightboxes with the affected files? The takedown of kga's google search site went pretty quick compared to all other actions we are waiting for.

« Reply #795 on: February 01, 2013, 13:57 »
+11
I believe they are listening. I believe that the collective group of contributors willing to take action to protect their rights is effective. I believe we are getting somewhere.

They have indicated that they are in discussion, acknowledging that our concerns are of interest to them. That is the first step. But, a train can't stop on a dime and this is a negotiation process that will reasonably take some time.

I would like to suggest that we remain banded together, on high alert, ready to move, and visible as a concerned group to the outside world.  But, that we acknowledge their initial response with a stated postponement of D-Day for 2 weeks pending more information. If we have no satisfying details regarding a revised agreement with Getty as well as their policy on such deals in the future, then we move to deactivate. That is not evidence of a weak position, but rather of a serious party in the heat of negotiation.


If this were their first infraction, what you are saying makes sense. But this is the billionth, and their words mean nothing. Time after time they have had epic fails.

« Reply #796 on: February 01, 2013, 14:16 »
+17
Delaying now would signal lack of commitment and sincerity. The momentum that has built up would dissipate and the issue would "sort of go away" as Kelly Thomson would describe it.

« Reply #797 on: February 01, 2013, 16:57 »
+12
I'm not waiting.  So far, I've deactivated 30 images, 7 of which were flames, and plan to pull even more.  I estimate that the 30 I removed have brought iStock/Thinkstock between $40k - $50k in revenue to date (my portion is waaaaay smaller), so they have lost some strong earners.   They are valuable to me, too, which is why I can't afford to have them floating around out there for free.  Fortunately, I dropped the exclusive crown over a year ago and can at least earn something on them elsewhere. 

Pulling my photos from iStock is going to have a significant impact on me financially, and since I reinvest a big portion of my earnings back into photography, my gear budget is going to take a hit.  Plans for purchases at Canon, Tamron, Adobe, B&H Photo, AlienBees, Kelby Training, and my local camera shop will have to be reduced or eliminated this year, depending on how things shake out across the board.   And worse, I'll have to slow down production of the photo project I've been working on for special needs kids.  My earnings are funding the project. 

What a shame.  This dirty deal is going to impact more than just the contributor.     

« Reply #798 on: February 01, 2013, 17:05 »
+2
I only had a tiny portfolio with them which was looking to be quite a nice earner if I'd stayed long enough to build it up but I've deactivated already. Getty have proven that they cannot be trusted and only care about their own profit, the feeble 'updates' they've produced in the last few weeks are nothing more than spin, they're definitely not interested in negotiating.

farbled

« Reply #799 on: February 01, 2013, 17:49 »
+5
I only had a tiny portfolio with them which was looking to be quite a nice earner if I'd stayed long enough to build it up but I've deactivated already. Getty have proven that they cannot be trusted and only care about their own profit, the feeble 'updates' they've produced in the last few weeks are nothing more than spin, they're definitely not interested in negotiating.

+1, mine was just a start on my much larger one to try them out. But I'm done, I couldn't wait around to see if any of my bestsellers got taken. The account is now closed, nothing of mine is left there or on any sub sites of theirs. They will pay me out within the next 30 days according to their email. I have to say I'm disappointed that I can't add another income stream there without the fear of giving images away. Thanks to this forum for making me aware of this. Much luck to everyone reagdless of your decision, see ya over at Shutterstock! ;)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4811 Views
Last post February 28, 2011, 17:43
by click_click
17 Replies
5168 Views
Last post January 15, 2013, 08:21
by jtyler
35 Replies
6632 Views
Last post November 22, 2013, 14:24
by BaldricksTrousers
11 Replies
3520 Views
Last post October 01, 2014, 13:42
by Freedom
13 Replies
4882 Views
Last post April 16, 2015, 12:00
by tickstock

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results