Author Topic: sjlocke was just booted from iStock (Read 128234 times)

sharpshot · « **Reply #125 on:** February 11, 2013, 19:23 »

PetaPixel have the story.
http://www.petapixel.com/2013/02/11/istockphoto-booting-top-photographer-in-wake-of-gettygoogle-hoopla/

Ed · « **Reply #126 on:** February 11, 2013, 19:26 »

Gotta be honest, I think it's for the best. Sean has the talent and the know-how on how to succeed going forward. It's better to get this out of the way in one big swoop than being tortured with nonsense by iStock going forward in various forms including image refusals.

I say cheers as this can only be positive for Sean.

somethingpretentious · « **Reply #127 on:** February 11, 2013, 19:39 »

Quote from: Elenathewise on February 11, 2013, 18:23

Quote from: leaf on February 11, 2013, 18:11

I am really blind to what iStock (or Getty rather) feel they are gaining by removing Sean's port. If they say it is 'purely business' they must feel they are better off without his images or his presence on iStock. I just don't see it that way... quite the opposite actually.

Tyler, they are just acting like we're their employees - "you make trouble we'll fire you" or "you try to work somewhere else we'll fire you". I wish their bosses understood we're not on their payroll - they are simply our agent. So what, this particular agent dropped Sean - well I am sure there is line up of others waiting to pick up and represent his work.

Yes, and furthermore they just do not understand running a crowdsourced buisiness: A big part of the crowd follows Sean and now Sean is going somewhere else. Any risk his followers will go with him? Yes!

crazychristina · « **Reply #128 on:** February 11, 2013, 19:51 »

pieman has just asserted that Rob's going is unrelated to Sean's going. He's a good friend of Rob so this is probably not spin. Maybe the Stocksy issue is not that relevant in Sean's case.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #129 on:** February 11, 2013, 19:56 »

I have not one second's doubt that Sean will come out of this doing very well. But I do think it's deeply chilling that an organization would remove someone's livelihood with a piddling 30 days notice - and whatever Getty's reason, they don't have to have one according to the ASA.

All the iStock boosters who see a future there assume that the other party (Getty) will act reasonably and ethically. One might reasonably assume that being as successful as Sean has been would increase the likelihood that Getty would act reasonably and ethically - given that they both stand to benefit so much from a solid working partnership.

iStock's action has clearly demonstrated that no one should feel safe - not because of how much time and effort they put in to building or boosting or promoting iStock or their portfolio, or how long they'd been a member, or whatever their sales.

I read a story about Blackbeard (the pirate) shooting some random crew member and explaining that if you didn't act unpredictably and harshly on a regular basis people might take advantage of you, thinking you were going soft.

Thinking about Fair Trade terms with respect to Rob's and Sean's termination notices it had me considering what one would want in the ASA in place of the current 30 day notice (which I think is at all the agencies in similar form). How about that a 30-day notice from the agency would only be for violating the agreement. Terminations for no reason would require a longer notice period - 3 months perhaps - so that people wouldn't be cut off at the knees. It takes time to upload your portfolio (even if it isn't 12K images) to other agencies. The termination period should take account of that reality.

Tror · « **Reply #130 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:02 »

With so many big (and small) names getting pushed out of stock it seems to be obvious that those parties will reform with even more motivation (and probably even desperation) to form a site like stocksy. Congrats getty. Again you shoot yourself into the foot. I would be glad if I could be another bullet in there and join stocksy asap

gostwyck · « **Reply #131 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:07 »

Quote from: chromaco on February 11, 2013, 18:32

Perhaps they (Getty/Istock) were seeing the writing on the wall that he was on his was out the door and felt that it would be better for them to control the timing. If he chose to leave on his own it might almost be worse for them.

Having said that, I have always used Sean as a gauge to just how bad things might get. It always seemed to me that despite all apparent signs, as long as he was still there things might not be as bad as they appear. He always is a voice of reason for both sides and I trust his viewpoint. I assume I am not the only one who felt he had more insight into the situations than I did and I always waited for his response to a situation before I finally made up my own mind. Hopefully, he will weigh in on the other sites he chooses to upload to. I will be interested to hear his feedback on independence.

Thank you Sean for your efforts. Good luck - not that you'll need it.

Insightful post.

I see this as Getty management becoming impatient with Istock and the traditional relationship that they have had with their contributors __ in stark contrast to the way Getty has historically dealt with dissenters. Be under no illusion that Getty are now quite prepared to over-rule historical sensitivities in the management of Istock and deal directly with problems as they see them.

This particular issue, the Getty/Google-Drive deal, was very much a Getty rather than an Istock initiative and, as far as I'm aware, it has only been Istock contributors that have kicked up a fuss. With Sean having made us aware of it, researched it and provided some clever tools for us to identify our images and express our distaste ... it's pretty obvious why he would be Getty's target. It's just a shame he wasn't backed up by any others of his status (who chose to remain remarkably silent).

I'm still stunned. I would have said, before today, that Sean was actually Istock's greatest asset. As well as being a genius content provider, massive team-player and top contributor to Istock's bottom-line ... he kept it real. Someone we all looked up to (including the management of Istock).

As someone once said of a troublesome colleague, "I'd rather have him inside the tent and p1ssing outside ... than outside the tent and p1ssing inside.". Getty have made a huge mistake.

Mantis · « **Reply #132 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:09 »

Sean is like his avatar--Superman of stock. Although this probably stings a bit now, his creative business mind can now go ape sh_t.

All the remaining exclusives now know what a sh_t storm they're facing in terms of how Getty "really" supports them. This decision should be a brutal warning to their remaining exclusives (or non-exclusives for that matter) that Getty clearly defines their contributors as commodities, therefore making all of them easily expendable.

Hang tough, Sean, as we all know you will.

eurobanks · « **Reply #133 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:19 »

Quote from: Mantis on February 11, 2013, 20:09

Sean is like his avatar--Superman of stock. Although this probably stings a bit now, his creative business mind can now go ape sh_t.

Well said. And I'll be here waiting for him to start iLockephoto.

EmberMike · « **Reply #134 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:19 »

Quote from: Ed on February 11, 2013, 19:26

Gotta be honest, I think it's for the best. Sean has the talent and the know-how on how to succeed going forward. It's better to get this out of the way in one big swoop than being tortured with nonsense by iStock going forward in various forms including image refusals.

I say cheers as this can only be positive for Sean.

Long-term, it's probably for the best. I believe Sean will do better financially as an independent. Maybe not right away, but eventually.

But I don't think he's better off leaving istock in this way. He's at a disadvantage, with just 30 days to get things in order with other companies and maybe being at a disadvantage coming from a very public termination. I think his position would have been more advantageous if he were still fully on-board with istock and went to other companies expressing a possible interest in breaking exclusivity.

Instead, the companies he's approaching very likely already know that he has no where else to turn. He needs them more than they need him now. Whereas before he might have negotiated a better pay rate, an all-in no-review portfolio acceptance, etc.

Not saying he still can't do those things, just that he might have been in a better position to negotiate such things if he weren't being kicked out and were expressing an interest in leaving on his own instead.

Susan S. · « **Reply #135 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:30 »

I am totally gobsmacked by this. What a mindless, petty, idiotic thing for istock/getty to do. I’ve always argued that their policies were a sign of incompetence rather than malice. Now in one fell swoop they have demonstrated that it’s quite possible to be both malicious and incompetent at one and the same time.

I can’t think of anything else they could have done that would have demonstrated their complete and utter contempt for their contributor base so thoroughly.

cuethesun · « **Reply #136 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:53 »

Quote from: jsnover on February 11, 2013, 11:58

It's either heads on pikes (scare off the others who might be thinking of leaving so they get compliant and "behave), drive them all out (cull the exclusives to save money on royalty payments) or they're not very bright and haven't a clue what they've just done.

I reckon it's all three.

- They get flush out those who've been wavering
- They get to pay less to all the exclusives dropping their crowns AND distribute their images into darker corners of their network.
- If the above two are true, they might be 'clever', but they're stupid.

Mantis · « **Reply #137 on:** February 11, 2013, 20:58 »

Quote from: eurobanks on February 11, 2013, 20:19

Quote from: Mantis on February 11, 2013, 20:09
Sean is like his avatar--Superman of stock. Although this probably stings a bit now, his creative business mind can now go ape sh_t.

Well said. And I'll be here waiting for him to start iLockephoto.

I LOVE IT: ILOCKEPHOTO

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #138 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:00 »

Quote from: asiseeit on February 11, 2013, 17:27

Hey Michael. Read his blog post again, it sounds like he was helping them beta test their system.

So what? First of all, I was responding to someone mentioning an FB group could have been the reason. If that was a case, they must have sent termination to >100 other people just showing interest in the topic "Stocksy". I am in that FB group, I didn't receive a letter.

Secondly, Sean is one of the big guys in stock. Why wouldn't he look around in the market, why wouldn't he test things out, why wouldn't he talk to people? Are you just sitting tight and let things happen, trusting that the environment around you is never going to change? I wouldn't consider that smart business approach.

Any distributor terminating his relationship with a supplier just on the basis that the supplier has investigated other players in the market just shows that the distributor has lost all respect for the business of any of its suppliers. To me it says that the distributor trusts in the fact that there will always be enough suppliers and they prefer to deal with smaller ones because it will give them even more power. I would consider what this means to your future as well.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #139 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:03 »

Quote from: crazychristina on February 11, 2013, 19:51

pieman has just asserted that Rob's going is unrelated to Sean's going. He's a good friend of Rob so this is probably not spin. Maybe the Stocksy issue is not that relevant in Sean's case.

Well, it was one of the two things I got out of them, the other being Google and related, so if they had feelings about something else, I sure don't know. And Rob couldn't get any reason, so, who knows.

By the way, thanks again for the support. It's very much appreciated.

VB inc · « **Reply #140 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:06 »

This clearly tells me Getty has more unpleasant things in store for the contributors in the near future. For all the exclusives still hoping... this is an ominous sign. I fear it will only get worse.
They would not kick Sean out if they were willing to concede to any of our concerns or make it better for the contributor. It is business as usual to maximize profits.

I fully agree with Chromaco's post "Perhaps they (Getty/Istock) were seeing the writing on the wall that he was on his was out the door and felt that it would be better for them to control the timing. If he chose to leave on his own it might almost be worse for them."

They were fully aware of him starting his own discussion group to talk freely without the need for censorship. The script he wrote that quickly deactivates files with ease is a godsend for most contributors. I wonder how many thousands of files were deactivated this way. They have the data to prove it. And last but not least, Stocksy which he is a member of. This looks like some sort of plan B or exit strategy in their eyes.

Still, they can change all this around by making things better and getting on his and the contributors good side. But they wont. Because it really seems to me that the company motto is profit first, by all means necessary.

What happened to Sean is messed up, but i feel the most sorry for is for the people that have to work in that environment that is Getty. Im sure some really hate their jobs or really have to detach themselves from work. And I wonder about the people stuck on istock knowing they work in this corporate environment when just a few years ago, it was a different vibe all together. ok Im going off topic now.

audiogate · « **Reply #141 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:07 »

I rarely come in here but because the whole subject is censored at iStock I just wanted to say I am sorry to hear of this news. I wish Sean all the best and am sure his portfolio will be immensely successful.

gostwyck · « **Reply #142 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:12 »

Quote from: Susan S. on February 11, 2013, 20:30

I am totally gobsmacked by this. What a mindless, petty, idiotic thing for istock/getty to do. I’ve always argued that their policies were a sign of incompetence rather than malice. Now in one fell swoop they have demonstrated that it’s quite possible to be both malicious and incompetent at one and the same time.

I can’t think of anything else they could have done that would have demonstrated their complete and utter contempt for their contributor base so thoroughly.

I couldn't agree more. I really couldn't think of anythink more Getty could have done to damage their sales, un-nerve and undermine their ~~existing~~ remaining exclusives and boost their competition. Oringer must be running around giving high-fives to anyone he meets right now. Those financial projections will be so much easier to reach with Mr Locke's portfolio on SS ... and not on IS. What a gift!

tickstock · « **Reply #143 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:18 »

Quote from: gostwyck on February 11, 2013, 21:12

Oringer must be running around giving high-fives to anyone he meets right now. Those financial projections will be so much easier to reach with Mr Locke's portfolio on SS ... and not on IS. What a gift!

So he is submitting to the sub sites, I always thought he opposed putting his images there. That is big news.

gillian vann · « **Reply #144 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:26 »

Quote from: VB inc on February 11, 2013, 21:06

I fully agree with Chromaco's post "Perhaps they (Getty/Istock) were seeing the writing on the wall that he was on his was out the door and felt that it would be better for them to control the timing. If he chose to leave on his own it might almost be worse for them."

hmm, worse than pushing Sean into martrydom? Terminating Sean keeps them as the evil overlords and keeps us peasants on the path to revolt. Is that really how they want to play this?

Sadstock · « **Reply #145 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:27 »

Quote from: tickstock on February 11, 2013, 21:18

Quote from: gostwyck on February 11, 2013, 21:12
Oringer must be running around giving high-fives to anyone he meets right now. Those financial projections will be so much easier to reach with Mr Locke's portfolio on SS ... and not on IS. What a gift!
So he is submitting to the sub sites, always thought he opposed putting his images there. That is big news.

--------------------
Unless I missed it, he did not say where he would be submitting, only that his stuff would be on a few sites shortly.

JPSDK · « **Reply #146 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:27 »

Sean, first, Im sorry you have now lost an income.
You have also gotten new oppertunities, I hope it will work out for the better for you.

Next, I saw it coming. Companies do not like activities like scripts that facilitates destructive actions. They have designed the site so its exactly as difficult to deactivate as they want, so we do not deactivate too quickly.

Then there are a few interesting things in how the case developed.
1.. You were informed in a telephone call (means you dont have any proof of what they said, and they are afraid of that proof, again means that their reasons might not hold water)
2.. They mentioned "the exclusive spirit". Means they are VERY afraid of upcoming alternatives.
3.. They mentioned that you have taken part in an undermining protest. Means that the protest hurt them, and since they kick you out, they are afraid of future protests.
4.. They have done the calculations and figured out that you and the protest has cost them more than you earn for them. Which is interesting, because then you know something about the financial impact of the protest.
5.. Timing. They kicked you AFTER the protest and not before. Means they waited to see how big the impact was, so it was bigger than they expected.

Best wishes...

ShadySue · « **Reply #147 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:28 »

Quote from: tickstock on February 11, 2013, 21:18

Quote from: gostwyck on February 11, 2013, 21:12
Oringer must be running around giving high-fives to anyone he meets right now. Those financial projections will be so much easier to reach with Mr Locke's portfolio on SS ... and not on IS. What a gift!
So he is submitting to the sub sites, I always thought he opposed putting his images there. That is big news.

He has not said that he is. Some people are assuming that he will. I suspect and hope he will not be forced to.

JPSDK · « **Reply #148 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:31 »

And yes, SS is fishing, we can see that in their press releases.
Smart guys.

Beach Bum · « **Reply #149 on:** February 11, 2013, 21:42 »

The reason for this is simple. Getty couldn't allow Sean to interfere with their plans to destroy microstock.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: sjlocke was just booted from iStock (Read 128234 times)

sharpshot

Ed

somethingpretentious

crazychristina

Jo Ann Snover

Tror

gostwyck

Mantis

eurobanks

EmberMike

Susan S.

cuethesun

Mantis

MichaelJayFoto

Sean Locke Photography

VB inc

audiogate

gostwyck

tickstock

gillian vann

Sadstock

JPSDK

ShadySue

JPSDK

Beach Bum

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors