After the current events in IS I think that the only way to scare the sh*t out of Getty and IS management is for non-exclusives to start a campaign globally targeting picture buyers. Let's make an e-mail, showing how exploitive IS is, and that they can buy the same images from agencies like DT, SS, etc., and even alamy, for a lower price for them and a far higher and fairer commission for the photographers.

Also making them realize that turning this business unsustainable for the photographers will kill their content suppliers and large quantities of good quality imagery will stop.

This is THE ONLY way to pressure Getty and IS. Burn a hole in their pocket!

Threatening to stop uploading, or deleting portfolios is just a huge BS that never worked and never will. The only power we have is to influence those who put the money in the business, the picture buyers.

And it doesn't take a Union to do this, or global organization. Just a good and true e-mail, which could be translated into several languages. Then each of us could search for a series of designer companies, send the e-mail asking them to pass to their contacts and soon enough the designers would become aware of the way IS is likely to damage their quality and cheap source of images.

This is the only way. Stop uploading, deleting portfolios and unions are just BS and everyone knows it wont happen to a scale to bother the administration of these agencies.

And it will send a strong signal to all the other agencies thinking of scr*wing us.

I have already started on this by posting in a couple of designer's forums about how Getty/iStock treats their photographers and recommended them to go shop elsewhere (SS, DT, FT, Veer) if they want to be more ethical and fair.

A written letter would be a very effective way to make some changes.

I've also mentioned previously that IS contributors should take turns calling their support hotline either until their system breaks down or until they realize they cannot provide adequate service for their buyers.

That would hurt them in the long run as well.

With today's means like VOIP calling virtually anyone can call for free their support lines both at HQ and the 1-800 numbers.

I think that's just harrassing.

Interesting! (not that with phone)

They often justify their big piece of the cake with expensive investments in marketing...
To see what can be done with 15% vs. 85%...

Yeah, recommend those other sites like FT and DT because they have never lowered royalty rates on us... oh wait, they have. The list of companies that haven't seems to be getting smaller and smaller.

Yes, they have lowered their royalty rates. But they at least have a long way to go to 15%

Targeting image users is a waste of time. This will of course never happen so I have no dreams in this regard but the only thing that would work is if every single contributor started to deactivate ALL of their images. And even as Getty said well maybe we should revisit this, even then you would not stop. Once the ENTIRE collection was sitting in the deactivated basket THEN they would be willing to talk. The whole event would last about a week, all images would be automatically reinstated and a guaranteed contract would be put into place where no one would worry about this again. Simple.

I agree 100%....the buyers are the pockets of iStock and that is the only way to get the message across. There are millions of contributors that probably don't even know what is going on or they don't care. They will continue to upload. The BUYERS have to be the targets, that is the only way Getty will get the message.

Not just you but it was a nice message to quote for my thoughts.

After we drive the buyers to the competition and ruin it for IS/Getty, one of the only two good paying agencies, how do you get the customers back? Oh wait, we just drove them away and screwed ourselves. Not everyone has their images on FT, DT and BigStock.

It maybe be a hasty decision to get revenge and drive our own business and customers away!

Think of the long term implications, not just a hasty retaliation to something we don't like!

Quote from: RacePhoto on September 08, 2010, 11:53

After we drive the buyers to the competition and ruin it for IS/Getty, one of the only two good paying agencies, how do you get the customers back? Oh wait, we just drove them away and screwed ourselves. Not everyone has their images on FT, DT and BigStock.

Then they should start uploading to FT, DT, BigStock and others.  This isn't only about getting iStock to take notice.  It's also about cutting off their air supply and getting a fair deal elsewhere.  If iStock reacts quickly and well, then maybe they can reverse the tide of desertions.  And if they can't or won't, then those other agencies (and we) will be the beneficiaries of their loss.  After all, 81% of my stock income comes from not-iStock.  Increasing that percentage doesn't scare me, especially if the absolute numbers increase as well.

Ah I see, we should all work with your program instead of our own? (nothing personal just a point of logic)

Some people make 100% from IS, you don't mind hurting them? I make 50% of my micro earnings from IS and 50% fro SS, I pretty much ignore the rest. You don't care about me. (OK fair enough, you don't need to ) But some people don't want to work with FT, DT, or others, but you think we all need to get revenge, without considering the extended effects and harm for the long term, including how it may harm the people, possibly friends, who are in the same position as you.

On the other hand, maybe I'm worried too much and everyone here can "show iStock" and it's like a butterfly landing on an aircraft carrier.

It's true that any effective form of industrial action hurts everybody involved, not just one side.

The objective is to prove to the employer that going beyond a certain point will cause it damage that is disproportionate to any gain. Proving that point always harms the people who are making it, too. It is the fact that they are willing to act despite the harm they will do to their own interests that proves the employer wrong.

Has it got to that point?

Targeting image users is a waste of time. This will of course never happen so I have no dreams in this regard but the only thing that would work is if every single contributor started to deactivate ALL of their images. And even as Getty said well maybe we should revisit this, even then you would not stop. Once the ENTIRE collection was sitting in the deactivated basket THEN they would be willing to talk. The whole event would last about a week, all images would be automatically reinstated and a guaranteed contract would be put into place where no one would worry about this again. Simple.

That's a very nice idea, I agree with it. But only in the case we can reactive them without much issues. We could desactivate them one week and see, until they change their mind on most of their new royaltee sheet

After we drive the buyers to the competition and ruin it for IS/Getty, one of the only two good paying agencies, how do you get the customers back? Oh wait, we just drove them away and screwed ourselves. Not everyone has their images on FT, DT and BigStock.

It maybe be a hasty decision to get revenge and drive our own business and customers away!

Away? Where? Hopefully somewhere they pay more than 20% for the photographer.

Not everyone has their images on every site, but if they are not exclusive they should have their images at least on the big 4.
The important part is that we don't feed the clients propaganda, just sincerely tell them how iStock treats their contributors (and maybe in comparison how other sites treats us)

BS!  why start a stupid thread like this and many others??  they serve no purposes what so ever and just reduces us to vendictive crap merchants. Nobody here has got any power to do anything against Getty/IS.  We are a fly in the ointment. Deal with it.