pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: If someone is IS Exclusive, can they sell their IS rejects on other stock sites?  (Read 3284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 29, 2010, 21:06 »
0
It seems like if IS REJECTS an image, and you are Exclusive...you should be allowed to sell it somewhere else. What is the ruling on that. I suppose you would need a different account etc...


zzz

« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2010, 21:07 »
0
You are obligated by your contract with iStock not to do so.

« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2010, 21:10 »
0
Just found this... never mind.. ::)

Are there other restrictions?

    * Images, video or audio files may not be sold on the artist's own site (including collections, CD-ROMs, etc).
    * Artist may not give away files for free, from their own or any other site.
    * Rejected files may not be sold elsewhere

bittersweet

« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2010, 22:12 »
0
Just found this... never mind.. ::)

Are there other restrictions?

    * Images, video or audio files may not be sold on the artist's own site (including collections, CD-ROMs, etc).
    * Artist may not give away files for free, from their own or any other site.
    * Rejected files may not be sold elsewhere


There are many other restrictions, which you should really take the time to read and understand before signing up:
Quote
http://www.istockphoto.com/asa_exclusive.php

« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2010, 02:26 »
0
Istock have rejected images that have made hundreds of dollars for me on other sites.  One of the many reasons I wont consider going exclusive.

« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2010, 08:45 »
0
Istock have rejected images that have made hundreds of dollars for me on other sites.  One of the many reasons I wont consider going exclusive.

D_mn but you're right.  I just looked at the email folder where I store istock communications and the most recent month's worth of emails contains a 90% acceptance notifications, until right around Sept. 17 it reverses to 90% rejection - including many very similar photos of the same subjects from the same shoots.  And these are IMHO attractive looking shots of rare, extremely unrepresented subject matter.  If the subject is isolated it is "too feathered or too rough" or plain old "isolation", if it is not isolated it is "lighting".  Now the second rejections are starting to pile up, sometimes with different complaints from the original rejection.  If this is happening to other contributors then I guess the scout pipeline must be stuffed almost to burst.

I get the feeling they don't want any small contributors, at any commission rate, whether exclusive or not.  Which will leave them with a small number of factory contributors shooting tens of thousands of bland, safe copycat images fethcing a high commission rate which they claimed they couldn't sustain.  Maybe the plan is as someone else suggested to eliminate all the small fry, then push whoever's left down to 20%.

« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2010, 10:12 »
0
I wonder what exactly they do pay for reviewing.  If they get rid of all of us and let the exclusives self-govern, they will surely save millions.

« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2010, 15:10 »
0
I've always wondered if rejected images could be sold as RM elsewhere, or if they exclusively rejected as well.

ShadySue

« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2010, 16:01 »
0
I've always wondered if rejected images could be sold as RM elsewhere, or if they exclusively rejected as well.
Yes, but you must contact CR each time, to get permission for every image individually.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
4145 Views
Last post July 06, 2008, 18:00
by dullegg
13 Replies
3597 Views
Last post April 15, 2014, 10:17
by Morphart
4 Replies
2759 Views
Last post March 17, 2015, 02:02
by MichaelJayFoto
23 Replies
6835 Views
Last post January 29, 2018, 10:10
by Microstock Man
4 Replies
575 Views
Last post May 20, 2019, 01:58
by Not Today

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results