pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: istock organises conference call with selected few  (Read 82116 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #275 on: March 15, 2011, 17:48 »
0
Just wish Lisa could be there too on behalf of independent contributors.

For the record, my pick would have been you.  Don't know anyone LESS likely to be intimidated. 

Haha! So true. Or less likely to be fleeced.


« Reply #276 on: March 15, 2011, 18:13 »
0
This is interesting (via Cogent_Marketing):

I forwarded the NDA to a colleague of mine this evening - he is a sitting District Court Judge in the UK. He was immediately concerned by the contents of the NDA and sent it onto a QC (Queens Counsel) based in a London chambers for comment. She has now responded back, pro bono.

Her feedback is interesting. Without the legalistic jargon - "This NDA is unenforceable under English or international law and is in contradiction to seven specific and identifiable criteria of non-disclosure censure" I quote, "even a very junior counsel could ride a horse and carriage through this NDA in either an English or an international court". It would also be unenforceable.

I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?

« Reply #277 on: March 15, 2011, 19:09 »
0
This is interesting (via Cogent_Marketing):

I forwarded the NDA to a colleague of mine this evening - he is a sitting District Court Judge in the UK. He was immediately concerned by the contents of the NDA and sent it onto a QC (Queens Counsel) based in a London chambers for comment. She has now responded back, pro bono.

Her feedback is interesting. Without the legalistic jargon - "This NDA is unenforceable under English or international law and is in contradiction to seven specific and identifiable criteria of non-disclosure censure" I quote, "even a very junior counsel could ride a horse and carriage through this NDA in either an English or an international court". It would also be unenforceable.

I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?


I saw a couple of things that I was dubious about, but seven? ROFLAMO

« Reply #278 on: March 15, 2011, 19:13 »
0
I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?[/i]
Don't be hatin' on Canada :)

« Reply #279 on: March 15, 2011, 19:17 »
0
I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?[/i]
Don't be hatin' on Canada :)

Hey, it wasn't me, I was just reposting. I love you guys. :)

« Reply #280 on: March 15, 2011, 19:21 »
0
I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?[/i]
Don't be hatin' on Canada :)

Hey, it wasn't me, I was just reposting. I love you guys. :)

Actually, I'm not Canadian, just a Canuckophile  :P  I live in a border state, though (Washington). I'm on the call and it will be 7 AM my time yikes.

« Reply #281 on: March 15, 2011, 19:42 »
0
This is interesting (via Cogent_Marketing):

I forwarded the NDA to a colleague of mine this evening - he is a sitting District Court Judge in the UK. He was immediately concerned by the contents of the NDA and sent it onto a QC (Queens Counsel) based in a London chambers for comment. She has now responded back, pro bono.

Her feedback is interesting. Without the legalistic jargon - "This NDA is unenforceable under English or international law and is in contradiction to seven specific and identifiable criteria of non-disclosure censure" I quote, "even a very junior counsel could ride a horse and carriage through this NDA in either an English or an international court". It would also be unenforceable.

I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?


Odd how pretty much everyone else seems to feel it's a pretty standard NDA.

« Reply #282 on: March 15, 2011, 19:43 »
0
Actually, I'm not Canadian, just a Canuckophile  :P  I live in a border state, though (Washington). I'm on the call and it will be 7 AM my time yikes.


So do you know who else - you, Sean and ??

« Reply #283 on: March 15, 2011, 20:01 »
0
This is interesting (via Cogent_Marketing):

I forwarded the NDA to a colleague of mine this evening - he is a sitting District Court Judge in the UK. He was immediately concerned by the contents of the NDA and sent it onto a QC (Queens Counsel) based in a London chambers for comment. She has now responded back, pro bono.

Her feedback is interesting. Without the legalistic jargon - "This NDA is unenforceable under English or international law and is in contradiction to seven specific and identifiable criteria of non-disclosure censure" I quote, "even a very junior counsel could ride a horse and carriage through this NDA in either an English or an international court". It would also be unenforceable.

I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?


Odd how pretty much everyone else seems to feel it's a pretty standard NDA.

Lawyers write NDAs all the time - but it takes a real expert to  draft one that will actually stick. Most of them are like warning take down letters from lawyers with regard to intellectual property- enough to scare off/ensure good behaviour by those who don't have deep enough pockets (ie most people) to test the things in court.  Many if tested in court would probably be shot down in flames. It's the probably that is the killer as it's a very expensive bet to make.

NB I am not a lawyer - but i have one in the family.

« Reply #284 on: March 15, 2011, 20:08 »
0


So do you know who else - you, Sean and ??
[/quote]
Nope. I haven't signed the NDA yet, so that's the truth  ;)

« Reply #285 on: March 15, 2011, 20:43 »
0

Odd how pretty much everyone else seems to feel it's a pretty standard NDA.

Yes, it pretty much looks like a standard NDA... like the ones you go and buy at Office Depot  :D

vonkara

« Reply #286 on: March 15, 2011, 21:10 »
0
It's well known that Istock is part of Calgary proudness though. It's possible that some "authorities" would favor them in some ways.

Calgary is the headquarters of most tar sand industries. They basically destroyed some of the beautifulest lakes in the name of money, why not lives.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2011, 21:19 by Vonkara »

« Reply #287 on: March 15, 2011, 22:12 »
0


So do you know who else - you, Sean and ??
Nope. I haven't signed the NDA yet, so that's the truth  ;)
[/quote]

:)

Nano just posted that she's on the list

« Reply #288 on: March 15, 2011, 22:29 »
0


So do you know who else - you, Sean and ??
Nope. I haven't signed the NDA yet, so that's the truth  ;)

:)

Nano just posted that she's on the list
[/quote]

cool, she's a great choice!

« Reply #289 on: March 15, 2011, 23:39 »
0
Take this FWIW, but I just wanted to add a bit of historical context, the distrust of non-exclusive contributors is ingrained in the iStock DNA. Back in 2003-04 (pre-exclusivity) it was becoming rather common to see people who were contributors one day turn competitors the next. Serban's iStock username was Dreamstime (he even had a FIOTW way back when). Duncan, Canstock's founder, was M5laser or something like that on iStock before he started his site. Tim and Dawn at Bigstock, yep, former iStock contributors. I'm sure there were others, but the point is, this is all old stuff that is hard for them to forget. Around the same time as these contributors turned competitors appeared on the scene there was also increasing heat from the so-called "traditional" stock photographers (most notably a group of Alamy contributors), which further contributed to the siege mentality that exists today.

Of course the irony is that current exclusive contributors largely owe their exclusive benefits to these folks, as the exclusivity program was largely a circling of the wagons reaction to everything happening at the time. So, don't take it too personally, this is all old stuff.

------------------------------
So Rob, what's the name of your competing site going to be?  Sylvantime?  Robstock?  ;D

Microbius

« Reply #290 on: March 16, 2011, 02:41 »
0
This is interesting (via Cogent_Marketing):

I forwarded the NDA to a colleague of mine this evening - he is a sitting District Court Judge in the UK. He was immediately concerned by the contents of the NDA and sent it onto a QC (Queens Counsel) based in a London chambers for comment. She has now responded back, pro bono.

Her feedback is interesting. Without the legalistic jargon - "This NDA is unenforceable under English or international law and is in contradiction to seven specific and identifiable criteria of non-disclosure censure" I quote, "even a very junior counsel could ride a horse and carriage through this NDA in either an English or an international court". It would also be unenforceable.

I'll state in again, only this could happen in Canada. What a bunch of amateurs. They cannot even get the wording of an NDA. What possible hope do they have in stopping the theft of our copyrighted IPR's?

That's the problem with crowd sourcing, someone in the crowd might know a QC, brilliant  ;D

« Reply #291 on: March 16, 2011, 07:22 »
0
Take this FWIW, but I just wanted to add a bit of historical context, the distrust of non-exclusive contributors is ingrained in the iStock DNA. Back in 2003-04 (pre-exclusivity) it was becoming rather common to see people who were contributors one day turn competitors the next. Serban's iStock username was Dreamstime (he even had a FIOTW way back when). Duncan, Canstock's founder, was M5laser or something like that on iStock before he started his site. Tim and Dawn at Bigstock, yep, former iStock contributors. I'm sure there were others, but the point is, this is all old stuff that is hard for them to forget. Around the same time as these contributors turned competitors appeared on the scene th ere was also increasing heat from the so-called "traditional" stock photographers (most notably a group of Alamy contributors), which further contributed to the siege mentality that exists today.

Of course the irony is that current exclusive contributors largely owe their exclusive benefits to these folks, as the exclusivity program was largely a circling of the wagons reaction to everything happening at the time. So, don't take it too personally, this is all old stuff.

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

So Rob, what's the name of your competing site going to be?  Sylvantime?  Robstock?  ;D

KoolaidStock!  :P

« Reply #292 on: March 16, 2011, 08:18 »
0
iRockStock

Pixel-Pizzazz

« Reply #293 on: March 16, 2011, 08:56 »
0
So, how are the five being 'elected'?  Who is selecting them from the 'nominees'?  Please don't tell me it is IS!

« Reply #294 on: March 16, 2011, 09:13 »
0

Odd how pretty much everyone else seems to feel it's a pretty standard NDA.

At worst it is effective, at best it is meaningless. It's not a problem for you/us if it is worthless.

« Reply #295 on: March 16, 2011, 09:18 »
0
I predict this whole thing is going to be extremely anti-climactic.

Pixel-Pizzazz

« Reply #296 on: March 16, 2011, 09:28 »
0
I just read over at IS that neither Whiteway nor Jsnover have been contacted to participate in the call.

what?????????


YEP, I think I was right with my first post:

What a bunch of horse poop!

I'm so glad to be rid of IS and all the drama.  This pushed me to finally close my port.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2011, 10:13 by Pixel-Pizzazz »

« Reply #297 on: March 16, 2011, 09:39 »
0
I predict this whole thing is going to be extremely anti-climactic.

Thats almost a guarantee and the point. A smart move on istocks part to get the community to vote on five who will listen and come back to calm the angry mob.

« Reply #298 on: March 16, 2011, 11:42 »
0
I predict this whole thing is going to be extremely anti-climactic.

Thats almost a guarantee and the point. A smart move on istocks part to get the community to vote on five who will listen and come back to calm the angry mob.

And look, it has postponed any further talk of audits and legal action for at least a few days...as someone mentioned earlier (maybe caspixel?), maybe enough time to cook the books?  ;)

« Reply #299 on: March 16, 2011, 11:51 »
0
I predict this whole thing is going to be extremely anti-climactic.

Thats almost a guarantee and the point. A smart move on istocks part to get the community to vote on five who will listen and come back to calm the angry mob.

And look, it has postponed any further talk of audits and legal action for at least a few days...as someone mentioned earlier (maybe caspixel?), maybe enough time to cook the books?  ;)

Not only has it postponed it, but when the trusted Fab 5 come back with, "iStock is on the up-and-up and doing everything they can" it will effectively extinguish it. Who even thinks for a second that iStock is not going to put it's best foot forward in this conference call (which they have complete control over)?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4431 Views
Last post April 07, 2011, 21:28
by madelaide
58 Replies
18047 Views
Last post May 04, 2011, 16:23
by donding
5 Replies
3203 Views
Last post May 06, 2011, 13:09
by caspixel
0 Replies
1917 Views
Last post August 07, 2013, 19:25
by WarrenPrice
1 Replies
3840 Views
Last post April 28, 2017, 11:27
by Niakris

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors