Author Topic: Going over Kelly's head: an iStock contributorship call to action (Read 18123 times)

OhGoAway! · « **on:** April 15, 2011, 18:33 »

Friends and fellow contributors:

As we continue to identify and struggle with site troubles, bugs, and other legacy issues in addition to the changes from last fall, our frustrations seem to mount ever higher. Our eroding faith in and dissatisfaction with iStock has many contributors discussing the idea of a third-party audit and, potentially, a class-action lawsuit. Rather than abandon our relationship with the company completely, however, many of us have discussed other avenues toward ameliorating the problems and addressing our myriad concerns. To this end, a few of us have taken a preliminary step in this direction; we have written the following general letter, addressed to Hellman & Friedman, in hopes that they will act so that we, the contributors, do not have to take these additional and potentially irrevocable steps ourselves. It is our hope that, in its role as investors/owners, Hellman & Friedman will take our concerns to heart by reviewing and resolving said issues. However, in order to get Hellman & Friedman to do this, you must do your part by making your wishes known. That is why we are asking you to print, sign, and snail mail the following letter directly to Hellman & Friedman. Adapt it as you wish, but do send it along if, like us, you are tired of voicing your concerns to iStockphoto directly and getting unsatisfactory answers or results.

Please post your letters to Mr. Andy Ballard and Mr. Brian Powers. Both are Managing Directors of Hellman & Friedman and Directors at Getty Images, Inc. The address is:

Hellman & Friedman LLC
390 Park Avenue
21st Floor
New York, NY 10022

Thank you.

----------------------------------

Dear Hellman & Friedman,

As one of your current holdings under the Getty family of companies, the present discord at iStockphoto LP between contributors and management should be of the utmost concern to you. Perhaps you are unaware and do not follow the forums on iStockphoto or Microstock Group forum (and perhaps then, you should) but without touching on the myriad problems at present, I will simply highlight one - failure to pay contributors what they are owed.

Per the fraudulent purchases from December onward, thousands (if not millions) of dollars were clawed back from contributing artists. Our intellectual property was indisputably stolen and is now in the hands of persons or entities unknown, being sold or distributed around the world without our consent or compensation for an unknown stretch of time into the future. This represents an affront on many levels, and at the very least, it is my belief, and that of many of my fellow contributing artists, that we should be compensated for the "sale" of the files initially purchased, fraudulent sale or not. In essence, we believe it is only right and fair that the money taken from us by iStockphoto LP for these fraudulent sales should be returned to us immediately. This in no way addresses the potential losses incurred by the artist resulting from fewer sales over the life of the photo (because of its black market distribution), but this solution would go far toward reassuring contributors that iStock recognizes their culpability in not protecting our intellectual property, as an agent should do.

Beyond that, details of the fraudulent sales are difficult to determine. iStockphoto has, in many instances, simply refused to give specifics to the contributors, and, when it has, those details have often not matched up with contributor account information. It would seem, given the breadth and depth of site and policy issues currently plaguing iStockphoto LP, a third-party audit is in order. Trust in iStockphoto and its management team has largely been lost and with a single look at either of the two forums mentioned, one discovers a wealth of threads detailing contributors' anger and frustration.

So before the company loses more exclusive content and contributors as artists begin to drop their exclusive commitment to iStockphoto LP, it may be prudent to act and straighten out the mess that iStockphoto has become. The most valuable piece of the Getty family of companies, iStockphoto can still be a key investment for Hellman if in good shape. And wouldn't that be the goal if you are, ultimately, to sell the company in future?

As it seems clear that Getty itself has no interest or authority in addressing these matters, I implore you to uphold the esteemed values that you have outlined for Hellman & Friedman's investment approach in order to set right iStockphoto LP:

"... the most important assets are the intangibles: the people, their business practices and intellectual capital, and their customer relationships. H&F has developed considerable experience addressing the complex issues often presented by investments in businesses of this type, including the importance of structuring appropriate incentive compensations plans and management retention programs."

If it seems that iStockphoto LP or Getty does not value its contributors or their intellectual capital, its relationship with us, or aboveboard business practices, I have confidence that - in contrast - Hellman & Friedman does value and properly understand these points and their merits.

I thank you for your time and look forward to the swift handling of these matters in lieu of what we contributors have been talking about - seeking out legal counsel and looking into a class-action lawsuit, based on the findings of an independent third-party audit.

Sincerely,

[Sign your name here]

nruboc · « **Reply #1 on:** April 15, 2011, 18:57 »

Nicely put

caspixel · « **Reply #2 on:** April 15, 2011, 19:22 »

Great letter. Go get 'em. And keep us posted on the progress.

Risamay · « **Reply #3 on:** April 15, 2011, 19:24 »

Thumbs up! Printing, signing, and snail mailing ...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #4 on:** April 15, 2011, 19:42 »

Quote

Friends and fellow contributors:

I don't know that. How about letting in on your name and all, if you're going to get all legal and business-ish like this?

OhGoAway! · « **Reply #5 on:** April 15, 2011, 20:12 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 15, 2011, 19:42

Quote
Friends and fellow contributors:

I don't know that. How about letting in on your name and all, if you're going to get all legal and business-ish like this?

How about not. Trust that I am a fellow contributor, as are the others involved in the drafting of this letter. Whether we're friends or not, depends on those of us you address individually. Regardless, I have no intention of being bated into using my contributor name, when there is absolutely no transparency evident that assures me -- without question -- that individuals cannot be penalized for outside statements. I still have posting privileges on iStock, and, despite my distrust of their policies, I do enjoy my earnings (what little there are of them these days) and intend to keep it this way.

If you feel so maligned by my address of "friends and fellow contributors," then please feel free to disregard the "friend" part.

nruboc · « **Reply #6 on:** April 15, 2011, 20:17 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 15, 2011, 19:42

Quote
Friends and fellow contributors:

I don't know that. How about letting in on your name and all, if you're going to get all legal and business-ish like this?

Strange that you would think he should give his name when posting a letter like this, but have nothing to say when anonymous exclusives who do nothing but defend IStock at every turn, bash on people....well ok, if you can't see the distinction

nruboc · « **Reply #7 on:** April 15, 2011, 20:19 »

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 20:12

Quote from: sjlocke on April 15, 2011, 19:42
Quote
Friends and fellow contributors:

I don't know that. How about letting in on your name and all, if you're going to get all legal and business-ish like this?

How about not. Trust that I am a fellow contributor, as are the others involved in the drafting of this letter. Whether we're friends or not, depends on those of us you address individually. Regardless, I have no intention of being bated into using my contributor name, when there is absolutely no transparency evident that assures me -- without question -- that individuals cannot be penalized for outside statements. I still have posting privileges on iStock, and, despite my distrust of their policies, I do enjoy my earnings (what little there are of them these days) and intend to keep it this way.

If you feel so maligned by my address of "friends and fellow contributors," then please feel free to disregard the "friend" part.

Thought that would be obvious, but guess not.....

SNP · « **Reply #8 on:** April 15, 2011, 20:23 »

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 20:12

Quote from: sjlocke on April 15, 2011, 19:42
Quote
Friends and fellow contributors:

I don't know that. How about letting in on your name and all, if you're going to get all legal and business-ish like this?

How about not. Trust that I am a fellow contributor, as are the others involved in the drafting of this letter. Whether we're friends or not, depends on those of us you address individually. Regardless, I have no intention of being bated into using my contributor name, when there is absolutely no transparency evident that assures me -- without question -- that individuals cannot be penalized for outside statements. I still have posting privileges on iStock, and, despite my distrust of their policies, I do enjoy my earnings (what little there are of them these days) and intend to keep it this way.

If you feel so maligned by my address of "friends and fellow contributors," then please feel free to disregard the "friend" part.

and yet presumably your real name is going on the letter you've sent to H&F. or did you send that anonymously also? why would anyone, who takes their business seriously, consider mailing this?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #9 on:** April 15, 2011, 20:31 »

Quote from: nruboc on April 15, 2011, 20:17

Strange that you would think he should give his name when posting a letter like this, but have nothing to say when anonymous exclusives who do nothing but defend IStock at every turn, bash on people....well ok, if you can't see the distinction

Whatever.

Look, that letter is awfully wordy, and it took me a while to find what you actually were asking for. You want the money back that IS took back due to the fraud that occurred. Ain't gonna happen. Not only is it months gone by now and people have moved on, but contractually they don't owe it to us:
"In all cases, payment of fees to the Supplier will be net of: .... (ii) bad debts or other uncollectible sums; "

Not that I wouldn't like it or don't feel it would be justified - I lost over $9000 or so. I just don't see it happening. There won't be any audit - there's no facility in the agreement to ask for one, like there is on Getty. No one is going to make a class action lawsuit either.

So, you can print and mail the letter. I just think you have better things you could be addressing, with a better chance of success.

Risamay · « **Reply #10 on:** April 15, 2011, 21:50 »

Quote from: SNP on April 15, 2011, 20:23

and yet presumably your real name is going on the letter you've sent to H&F. or did you send that anonymously also? why would anyone, who takes their business seriously, consider mailing this?

I think we all take this seriously or we wouldn't be here. We'd be off doing other things. But thanks for letting me know you don't consider me to be someone who takes my stock photo side-business seriously

Personally, I'm happy for a form letter that I can now personalize as I like. Plus, seems to me it'd have a greater possibility of effecting change if we're all mailing in similar letters covering basic issues. Isn't that the way most letter-writing campaigns and such work?

I'm not holding my breath where results are concerned, but if we don't kick the issues up higher, how can we possibly hope for change? To keep complaining or raising issues to iStock - about iStock - is to continue banging our heads on a brick wall and (continue to) get nowhere fast. To say nothing of a continually worsening, raging migraine!

ETA: The bigger a company gets, the less its owners actually know what the heck is going on at ground-level. Management and oversight only gets more cumbersome to do well as a business grows and does better. So for all we know, H&F knows nothing of what's *really* going on at IS and might well be happy that someone brought the brouhaha(s) to its attention. You just never know. Long story short, I once had exceptionally disappointing service at a major chain restaurant in college. My friend and I asked to speak with the manager. The manager was even more rude and colorful than our waitress. As the manager was spewing madness, I opened my purse and started taking notes. The manager watched me do this, and kept going. I even went so far as to tell her I intended to contact her superiors and she was like, "Go right the eff ahead." And I did. And she was fired as a result, as was the waitress. The entire staff at that location received a week-long customer service training, and I was given my money back and several vouchers for meals on the house. But all of that happened *only* because I spoke up [for myself].

OhGoAway! · « **Reply #11 on:** April 15, 2011, 22:04 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 15, 2011, 20:31

Quote from: nruboc on April 15, 2011, 20:17
Strange that you would think he should give his name when posting a letter like this, but have nothing to say when anonymous exclusives who do nothing but defend IStock at every turn, bash on people....well ok, if you can't see the distinction

Whatever.

Look, that letter is awfully wordy, and it took me a while to find what you actually were asking for. You want the money back that IS took back due to the fraud that occurred. Ain't gonna happen. Not only is it months gone by now and people have moved on, but contractually they don't owe it to us:
"In all cases, payment of fees to the Supplier will be net of: .... (ii) bad debts or other uncollectible sums; "

Not that I wouldn't like it or don't feel it would be justified - I lost over $9000 or so. I just don't see it happening. There won't be any audit - there's no facility in the agreement to ask for one, like there is on Getty. No one is going to make a class action lawsuit either.

So, you can print and mail the letter. I just think you have better things you could be addressing, with a better chance of success.

So far, I don't see any leadership stepping up from among the ranks. Personally, I'd welcome your insight -- or the insight of any number of bigger players than myself -- but outside NicoBlue, I don't anticipate much. This was an idea that was proposed by a fellow contributor and we collectively felt we could pursue on our budget (i.e., nothing). I'm happy to support other member-driven initiatives -- if only I could find some.

lagereek · « **Reply #12 on:** April 16, 2011, 00:09 »

With due respect but this is the wrong way to go about anything. Sorry.

sharpshot · « **Reply #13 on:** April 16, 2011, 02:01 »

I think things have become much worse with istock since Hellman & Friedman bought Getty. It just looks like they don't have any interest in contributors, they are focused on making as much money as possible from their asset. Good luck with this but I think the only weapon contributors have is their portfolios. I don't think they will become contributor friendly unless they realize that their business could be financially damaged by their contributors. I don't see istock improving until new buyers come along that are more interested in a long term investment.

gclk · « **Reply #14 on:** April 16, 2011, 03:20 »

Quote from: lagereek on April 16, 2011, 00:09

With due respect but this is the wrong way to go about anything. Sorry.

Do you mean writing to H&F is the wrong way to go about it, or you don't agree with what was said in the letter itself?

For me, I agree with Sean - although it stinks, the issue of the fraud money already returned is not something they're going to do anything about.

But I don't think that writing to H&F to outline concerns is a bad idea, and I don't think it's out of order to do so. Many of us could legitimately say that we've done our best to raise concerns directly to iStockphoto, and had no success: forum threads have been locked or deleted; support messages have had no response, and sitemails/emails to management have been ignored. Back in September/October when I got zero response from Support or KKT, I considered writing a letter to iStock & GI CEO Jonathan Klein and Getty Images Chairman Mark Getty, but decided against it at that time.

It's perfectly possible that management at H&F have little or no idea about the level of misgivings among iStock contributors. Presumably there's some kind of reporting system for iStock to feed high level information up the reporting structure. Perhaps if it's a weekly update, maybe they'd say:
- Sales turnover this week: $X.XX million
- Commission taken this week: $X.XX million
- Cumulative commission taken this financial year: $XX.XX million
- XXX new customers signed up
- Customers have purchased $X.XX million worth of credits
- $XXXX worth of expired credits
- XX referrals from iStock subscriptions to Thinkstock resulting in new Thinkstock accounts
- Staffing update: X resignations this week, X new starts; Currently advertising for 9 positions in Calgary, 5 in Europe, 2 in Brazil
- Press articles: no significant news
- etc...

But I doubt if iStock management would include:
- Contributor complaints at a very high level, approaching Sept 2010's record level. Support received XXX messages of concern or complaint.
- Most issues raised have been about iStock management failing to honour commitments posted on the site
- XX contributor threads were locked because they contained complaints that we don't want anybody to discuss
- X contributors threads were deleted because they contained complaints that we don't want anybody to see
- X contributors have removed their portfolios entirely from iStockphoto
- XX exclusive contributors have requested to drop their exclusivity and will be uploading their content to competitor sites in approximately 30 days.
- We had a conference call with concerned vector artists and had them sign a NDA. They won't be discussing any details until we release an update at a time of our choosing.
- etc

Regarding the identity of those writing to H&F - imho not wanting to reveal identities here is fine, but if organising a campaign to write to H&F in numbers, real identities need to be used for those letters to be taken seriously. For many reasons, but one of them being that if twenty anonymous iStock contributors write to H&F to raise concerns, how would know that all the letters didn't all come from one person?

cobalt · « **Reply #15 on:** April 16, 2011, 04:59 »

...or even from a competitor...its a business classic...

Don't mean to say that the OP doesn't have genuine concerns and that many istockers have reasons to be upset.

I agree with Sean the fraud issue is over and done with and it is certainly one, that management is aware of. They lost a lot more money than the contributors, Istock had to give their part back as well (which they probably already used for ongoing payments, wages, marketing)

If you are going to write, you definetly need to put your real name and business adress.

I believe that there are other ways of dealing with all the agencies, but I am not against writing to management if necessary.

Again, it is a normal part of business and I wouldnt be surprised if at every event or tunr someone already is writing to them. With over 70 000 contributors, they must be getting their share in the mail.

michealo · « **Reply #16 on:** April 16, 2011, 05:26 »

I think it's an excellent idea - shareholder or stakeholder activism is very powerful.

lagereek · « **Reply #17 on:** April 16, 2011, 05:49 »

Quote from: gclk on April 16, 2011, 03:20

Quote from: lagereek on April 16, 2011, 00:09
With due respect but this is the wrong way to go about anything. Sorry.

Do you mean writing to H&F is the wrong way to go about it, or you don't agree with what was said in the letter itself?

For me, I agree with Sean - although it stinks, the issue of the fraud money already returned is not something they're going to do anything about.

But I don't think that writing to H&F to outline concerns is a bad idea, and I don't think it's out of order to do so. Many of us could legitimately say that we've done our best to raise concerns directly to iStockphoto, and had no success: forum threads have been locked or deleted; support messages have had no response, and sitemails/emails to management have been ignored. Back in September/October when I got zero response from Support or KKT, I considered writing a letter to iStock & GI CEO Jonathan Klein and Getty Images Chairman Mark Getty, but decided against it at that time.

It's perfectly possible that management at H&F have little or no idea about the level of misgivings among iStock contributors. Presumably there's some kind of reporting system for iStock to feed high level information up the reporting structure. Perhaps if it's a weekly update, maybe they'd say:
- Sales turnover this week: $X.XX million
- Commission taken this week: $X.XX million
- Cumulative commission taken this financial year: $XX.XX million
- XXX new customers signed up
- Customers have purchased $X.XX million worth of credits
- $XXXX worth of expired credits
- XX referrals from iStock subscriptions to Thinkstock resulting in new Thinkstock accounts
- Staffing update: X resignations this week, X new starts; Currently advertising for 9 positions in Calgary, 5 in Europe, 2 in Brazil
- Press articles: no significant news
- etc...

But I doubt if iStock management would include:
- Contributor complaints at a very high level, approaching Sept 2010's record level. Support received XXX messages of concern or complaint.
- Most issues raised have been about iStock management failing to honour commitments posted on the site
- XX contributor threads were locked because they contained complaints that we don't want anybody to discuss
- X contributors threads were deleted because they contained complaints that we don't want anybody to see
- X contributors have removed their portfolios entirely from iStockphoto
- XX exclusive contributors have requested to drop their exclusivity and will be uploading their content to competitor sites in approximately 30 days.
- We had a conference call with concerned vector artists and had them sign a NDA. They won't be discussing any details until we release an update at a time of our choosing.
- etc

Regarding the identity of those writing to H&F - imho not wanting to reveal identities here is fine, but if organising a campaign to write to H&F in numbers, real identities need to be used for those letters to be taken seriously. For many reasons, but one of them being that if twenty anonymous iStock contributors write to H&F to raise concerns, how would know that all the letters didn't all come from one person?

H&F. dont give a * !! its probably them who are putting the thumbscrews on Getty who are putting the screws on IS, who are putting the screws on us!

Remember the old saying! crap always runs downhill.

RT · « **Reply #18 on:** April 16, 2011, 06:07 »

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 18:33

......but without touching on the myriad problems at present, I will simply highlight one - failure to pay contributors what they are owed.

Umm...they do pay contributors what they are owed, but assuming you're referring to the clawbacks from the credit card fraud instances we are not entitled to be paid for fraudulent transactions.

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 18:33

I thank you for your time and look forward to the swift handling of these matters in lieu of what we contributors have been talking about - seeking out legal counsel and looking into a class-action lawsuit, based on the findings of an independent third-party audit.

And you want to sue them for what exactly, acting within the law and the contract you signed with them! Good luck with that.

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 18:33

In essence, we believe it is only right and fair that the money taken from us by iStockphoto LP for these fraudulent sales should be returned to us immediately. This in no way addresses the potential losses incurred by the artist resulting from fewer sales over the life of the photo (because of its black market distribution), but this solution would go far toward reassuring contributors that iStock recognizes their culpability in not protecting our intellectual property, as an agent should do.

So you're saying that iStockphoto has benefitted from these fraudulent transactions - I hope you don't sign your name to this letter, or if you do I presume you can prove your statement because you are accusing them of an illegal act.

You like many of us are quite rightly very angry about the whole fraud thing, and this letter shows your anger. But your letter will be read by H+F and then thrown in the bin, they're a business and as annoying as it is you need to learn to understand that and forget your emotions. You also need to learn what exactly happened and what you're entitled to ask for because this letter shows you don't.

The best advice you can have is to get over it and move on.

cathyslife · « **Reply #19 on:** April 16, 2011, 07:21 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 16, 2011, 02:01

I think things have become much worse with istock since Hellman & Friedman bought Getty. It just looks like they don't have any interest in contributors, they are focused on making as much money as possible from their asset. Good luck with this but I think the only weapon contributors have is their portfolios. I don't think they will become contributor friendly unless they realize that their business could be financially damaged by their contributors. I don't see istock improving until new buyers come along that are more interested in a long term investment.

I agree with that statement.

I hope that this letter writing has some sort of effect, but the business really needs to be hit where it hurts...in the pocket. And that would take more than letter writing. That would take a whole bunch of contributors dropping exclusivity, stopping uploads or removing portfolios altogether. But again, that is the hard choice, and most contributors are happy with whatever little they are getting and aren't going to be willing to give up their income.

But I believe that doing something is better than doing nothing, so I hope your campaign helps.

SNP · « **Reply #20 on:** April 16, 2011, 10:26 »

Quote from: RT on April 16, 2011, 06:07

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 18:33
......but without touching on the myriad problems at present, I will simply highlight one - failure to pay contributors what they are owed.

Umm...they do pay contributors what they are owed, but assuming you're referring to the clawbacks from the credit card fraud instances we are not entitled to be paid for fraudulent transactions.

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 18:33
I thank you for your time and look forward to the swift handling of these matters in lieu of what we contributors have been talking about - seeking out legal counsel and looking into a class-action lawsuit, based on the findings of an independent third-party audit.

And you want to sue them for what exactly, acting within the law and the contract you signed with them! Good luck with that.

Quote from: OhGoAway! on April 15, 2011, 18:33
In essence, we believe it is only right and fair that the money taken from us by iStockphoto LP for these fraudulent sales should be returned to us immediately. This in no way addresses the potential losses incurred by the artist resulting from fewer sales over the life of the photo (because of its black market distribution), but this solution would go far toward reassuring contributors that iStock recognizes their culpability in not protecting our intellectual property, as an agent should do.

So you're saying that iStockphoto has benefitted from these fraudulent transactions - I hope you don't sign your name to this letter, or if you do I presume you can prove your statement because you are accusing them of an illegal act.

You like many of us are quite rightly very angry about the whole fraud thing, and this letter shows your anger. But your letter will be read by H+F and then thrown in the bin, they're a business and as annoying as it is you need to learn to understand that and forget your emotions. You also need to learn what exactly happened and what you're entitled to ask for because this letter shows you don't.

The best advice you can have is to get over it and move on.

the power we have is in our portfolios. so much has been happening over the last year. I think it's important to separate emotion from the fray and take a more objective approach. like cobalt said, they probably get letters like this on a regular basis. the greatest issue between me and iStock as an exclusive is the farming out of our work across partner sites and the gradual lowering of our royalties. the second-greatest issue for me is the flexible exclusivity that some contributors have, not to mention the massive influx of Getty collections into the iStock database.

I'm concerned that a partner program opt in will be compulsory at some point. not based on anything except watching where things are headed. I'm also most concerned about the distance that has grown between the community and operations. I fault contributors partly for this, who kicked up fuss after fuss in the iStock forums since the opt out badge campaign. not to negate concerns. now contributors are trying to publicly flame iStock/Getty and it all just seems like emotional ranting...even though it may be based on very legitimate concerns, the message is lost in the delivery. not to mention it's at the hands of people with far less to lose than heavy hitters who're sitting tight in general or going through proper channels.

I think the best thing contributors can do, no matter how upset, is take a step back and take an objective, realistic look at the situation.

stockastic · « **Reply #21 on:** April 16, 2011, 10:27 »

A noble attempt, and I applaud it, but don't hold your breath waiting for anything but a canned response from someone in their legal department. You're aiming 2 corporate tiers up from the point where the problem occurred and the decision was made. These at H&F see IStock itself as the "product" and what goes on inside IS day-to-day is of little interest to them.

jen · « **Reply #22 on:** April 16, 2011, 10:30 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 15, 2011, 20:31

Quote from: nruboc on April 15, 2011, 20:17
Strange that you would think he should give his name when posting a letter like this, but have nothing to say when anonymous exclusives who do nothing but defend IStock at every turn, bash on people....well ok, if you can't see the distinction

Whatever.

Look, that letter is awfully wordy, and it took me a while to find what you actually were asking for. You want the money back that IS took back due to the fraud that occurred. Ain't gonna happen. Not only is it months gone by now and people have moved on, but contractually they don't owe it to us:
"In all cases, payment of fees to the Supplier will be net of: .... (ii) bad debts or other uncollectible sums; "

Not that I wouldn't like it or don't feel it would be justified - I lost over $9000 or so. I just don't see it happening. There won't be any audit - there's no facility in the agreement to ask for one, like there is on Getty. No one is going to make a class action lawsuit either.

So, you can print and mail the letter. I just think you have better things you could be addressing, with a better chance of success.

I agree with Sean.

I also think you need to do more research. Your letter is obviously very angry, but a lot of it is also factually incorrect. (Like the part about iStock owing us the fraud money - as Sean pointed out, contractually they don't.) This letter would probably serve your interests better if you took a different approach (such as focusing on the "negligence" aspect of the fraud rather than the "iStock should give us the money as a gesture of goodwill" approach).

gostwyck · « **Reply #23 on:** April 16, 2011, 10:55 »

Quote from: cclapper on April 16, 2011, 07:21

I hope that this letter writing has some sort of effect, but the business really needs to be hit where it hurts...in the pocket. And that would take more than letter writing. That would take a whole bunch of contributors dropping exclusivity, stopping uploads or removing portfolios altogether. But again, that is the hard choice, and most contributors are happy with whatever little they are getting and aren't going to be willing to give up their income.

But I believe that doing something is better than doing nothing, so I hope your campaign helps.

I agree with Cathy. Although the letter is flawed in some respects it is good to see action being taken as well as thoughts expressed.

What I find so frustrating and galling about the situation with Istock (and FT too) is that in reality we the contributors really do have all the power if only we could organise ourselves sufficiently to express it into unified action. Istock's partial climbdown over the PP rates is a perfect example in which enough contributors refused to play and therefore left the PP with insufficient content to compete effectively against SS. I still hope that more independent contributors will have the sense to withdraw their images from the PP. We don't need SS forced into a competitive price war against TS which is what could ultimately happen.

If enough contributors refused to upload to Istock until the 'grandfathered canisters' compromise and the prevailing commission rates were restored how long would it take before Istock caved in? Contributors, both exclusive and independent, have far more to gain in the long run than they have to lose in the short term.

cthoman · « **Reply #24 on:** April 16, 2011, 11:01 »

I'd say if you feel strongly about this, then go ahead with it. There's nothing wrong with standing up for what you believe in. For me, the fraud was pretty low on my complaint list recently. I was lucky to only have a couple fraudulent sales.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Going over Kelly's head: an iStock contributorship call to action (Read 18123 times)

OhGoAway!

nruboc

caspixel

Risamay

Sean Locke Photography

OhGoAway!

nruboc

nruboc

SNP

Sean Locke Photography

Risamay

OhGoAway!

lagereek

sharpshot

gclk

cobalt

michealo

lagereek

RT

cathyslife

SNP

stockastic

jen

gostwyck

cthoman

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors