Author Topic: H&F presses on with $4 billion Getty Images sale (Read 36076 times)

Sadstock · « **Reply #125 on:** August 16, 2012, 16:30 »

Quote from: lisafx on August 16, 2012, 13:19

Quote from: traveler1116 on August 16, 2012, 13:07

So then what you are saying is that Getty did not sue? But at same the same time you're using that as evidence that Getty is in the business of suing and saying otherwise is "a blatant lie"?

From the letters I've seen posted, Getty is threatening to sue. Either they intend to follow through and sue, or they are "blatantly lying" in their letters by threatening to do so. Personally, if I got a letter from a company as well financed as Getty that was threatening to sue me, I would assume they mean what they say.

ETA: But then, perhaps their threats to sue are as empty as their assurances to contributors that "nothing will change". If so, then maybe they shouldn't be taken seriously after all.

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

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/
http://www.seotrainingsw.com/2011/09/getty-images-demand-letter/
http://womeninbusiness.about.com/b/2011/08/23/getty-image-settlement-demand-letter-scam-or-for-real.htm

Not defending infringers, just posting this to show that Getty does do exactly what the music industry does to infringers. Not necessarily a bad thing by the way, but inconsistent with what the Carlyle guy was saying.

Note that these are the first three hits in the Google search which returned 8.5 million results to “letter from Getty images”.

lisafx · « **Reply #126 on:** August 16, 2012, 16:32 »

Quote from: cthoman on August 16, 2012, 16:24

LOL. I actually think both are true. The agencies are stupid because they could be earning more with better terms/prices and happier contributors. And, we are stupid for letting them get away with not doing it. I look at my numbers each month, and think that there is no real reason why I shouldn't be earning twice as much as I am. Move a few percentage points and some prices, and it wouldn't take much (even at half sales).

So true! And very diplomatically put too

ShadySue · « **Reply #127 on:** August 16, 2012, 16:35 »

Quote from: Sadstock on August 16, 2012, 16:30

Quote from: lisafx on August 16, 2012, 13:19
Quote from: traveler1116 on August 16, 2012, 13:07

So then what you are saying is that Getty did not sue? But at same the same time you're using that as evidence that Getty is in the business of suing and saying otherwise is "a blatant lie"?

From the letters I've seen posted, Getty is threatening to sue. Either they intend to follow through and sue, or they are "blatantly lying" in their letters by threatening to do so. Personally, if I got a letter from a company as well financed as Getty that was threatening to sue me, I would assume they mean what they say.

ETA: But then, perhaps their threats to sue are as empty as their assurances to contributors that "nothing will change". If so, then maybe they shouldn't be taken seriously after all.

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

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/
http://www.seotrainingsw.com/2011/09/getty-images-demand-letter/
http://womeninbusiness.about.com/b/2011/08/23/getty-image-settlement-demand-letter-scam-or-for-real.htm

Not defending infringers, just posting this to show that Getty does do exactly what the music industry does to infringers. Not necessarily a bad thing by the way, but inconsistent with what the Carlyle guy was saying.

Note that these are the first three hits in the Google search which returned 8.5 million results to “letter from Getty images”.

Didn't Johnathan Klein say in a recent interview that was linked here that they don't go after certain users as they hope to gain them as buyers later? E.g. educational use? But I've read (with no evidence, I suppose, so hearsay) that they have gone after kids for infringement.

I wonder what they do if a legitimate buyer for web use encourages its buyers to 'pin' their pages, including licensed images.

EmberMike · « **Reply #128 on:** August 16, 2012, 22:19 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on August 16, 2012, 13:07

So then what you are saying is that Getty did not sue? But at same the same time you're using that as evidence that Getty is in the business of suing and saying otherwise is "a blatant lie"?

The letters are threats of lawsuits and demands of monetary settlement. If you want to nit-pick the details, then no, they don't sue everyone. Factually, they threaten everyone with lawsuits, then expect people to either pay the sum given in their extortion letter or go to court. Either way it's still a lie. Getty takes legal action against any suspected infringement, either in the form of a demand for settlement or in a lawsuit.

Nice way to convert people to customers.

Lagereek · « **Reply #129 on:** August 17, 2012, 00:32 »

Quote from: EmberMike on August 16, 2012, 13:01

Quote from: Lagereek on August 16, 2012, 12:02
Well Mike, try and diversify your port a bit and you might have better luck, just a bit of an advice! apart from that its good.

I don't think my portfolio is the problem. I do fine at the 19 other agencies I sell images with. I used to pull $2k per month from istock. Now I'll be lucky if I hit $150 for the month. Meanwhile I'm having BMEs at other top agencies.

I wish it was as simple as diversification, but sadly, it's not.

Same story here, I used to pull a bit more from IS then you but Im down to a pittyfull amount in comparing. Ive given up on IS though, no diversity in the world would help there as long as independant, etc.
Further more, they really dont care, since Getty took over completely, theyre all on a monthly wage, bad days or good days, they still get the same payout. They couldnt give a s##t.

CarlssonInc · « **Reply #130 on:** August 17, 2012, 00:35 »

Quote from: Lagereek on August 17, 2012, 00:32

Quote from: EmberMike on August 16, 2012, 13:01
Quote from: Lagereek on August 16, 2012, 12:02
Well Mike, try and diversify your port a bit and you might have better luck, just a bit of an advice! apart from that its good.

I don't think my portfolio is the problem. I do fine at the 19 other agencies I sell images with. I used to pull $2k per month from istock. Now I'll be lucky if I hit $150 for the month. Meanwhile I'm having BMEs at other top agencies.

I wish it was as simple as diversification, but sadly, it's not.

Same story here, I used to pull a bit more from IS then you but Im down to a pittyfull amount in comparing. Ive given up on IS though, no diversity in the world would help there as long as independant, etc.
Further more, they really dont care, since Getty took over completely, theyre all on a monthly wage, bad days or good days, they still get the same payout. They couldnt give a s##t.

Christian, hope you're having a nice summer! However, you're making me a bit confused - I read yesterday that you were just about to pull the trigger on going exclusive with iStock and this morning you sum them up as crap more or less and that you have given up on them - what happened in less than 24 hrs?

thesentinel · « **Reply #131 on:** August 17, 2012, 01:21 »

Quote from: CarlssonInc. Stock Imagery Production on August 17, 2012, 00:35

Christian, hope you're having a nice summer! However, you're making me a bit confused - I read yesterday that you were just about to pull the trigger on going exclusive with iStock and this morning you sum them up as crap more or less and that you have given up on them - what happened in less than 24 hrs?

Another few bottles of single malt ?

Lagereek · « **Reply #132 on:** August 17, 2012, 01:54 »

Quote from: thesentinel on August 17, 2012, 01:21

Quote from: CarlssonInc. Stock Imagery Production on August 17, 2012, 00:35

Christian, hope you're having a nice summer! However, you're making me a bit confused - I read yesterday that you were just about to pull the trigger on going exclusive with iStock and this morning you sum them up as crap more or less and that you have given up on them - what happened in less than 24 hrs?

Another few bottles of single malt ?

Yeah I wish!

ShadySue · « **Reply #133 on:** August 17, 2012, 03:20 »

Quote from: Lagereek on August 17, 2012, 01:54

Quote from: thesentinel on August 17, 2012, 01:21
Quote from: CarlssonInc. Stock Imagery Production on August 17, 2012, 00:35

Christian, hope you're having a nice summer! However, you're making me a bit confused - I read yesterday that you were just about to pull the trigger on going exclusive with iStock and this morning you sum them up as crap more or less and that you have given up on them - what happened in less than 24 hrs?

Another few bottles of single malt ?

Yeah I wish!

Several dozen cans of lager would have the same effect, though the reek would certainly be different.

Lagereek · « **Reply #134 on:** August 17, 2012, 03:23 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 17, 2012, 03:20

Quote from: Lagereek on August 17, 2012, 01:54
Quote from: thesentinel on August 17, 2012, 01:21
Quote from: CarlssonInc. Stock Imagery Production on August 17, 2012, 00:35

Christian, hope you're having a nice summer! However, you're making me a bit confused - I read yesterday that you were just about to pull the trigger on going exclusive with iStock and this morning you sum them up as crap more or less and that you have given up on them - what happened in less than 24 hrs?

Another few bottles of single malt ?

Yeah I wish!

Several dozen cans of lager would have the same effect, though the reek would certainly be different.

Scotish Highland water!

Sadstock · « **Reply #135 on:** August 23, 2012, 20:48 »

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-08-23/gettys-pics-worth-1-000-words-and-3-dot-3-billion

Several mentions of "amateurs", no mention of being mortgaged but they do note that photographers are being squeezed.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: H&F presses on with $4 billion Getty Images sale (Read 36076 times)

Sadstock

lisafx

ShadySue

EmberMike

Lagereek

CarlssonInc

thesentinel

Lagereek

ShadySue

Lagereek

Sadstock

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors