pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: PD - Most absurd rejects ever  (Read 6190 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 22, 2013, 04:37 »
0
Hello everybody
probably you face the same absurd rejects with PD the wa did.
After i tried to get some reliable advices or rules from them and all tries failed because they only answer with empty phrases all my amployees told me to give PD the axe but i always believethat people are reasonable and fair and so i tried and tried - withot any results.


How do you cope with these absurd situation??

Lets face rhe facts:
PD rejects obviosly public buildings (churches, cathedrals, governmental buildings etc) with the argument that you need a PR.
PD rejects pictures like these ( http://www.axellauer.de/photodune-rejects/ )because of missing MR , at the same time they accept pictures like these (  ) and i am sure that the photographer has no MRs
PD rejects a image of a flower bouquet with the reason that you need a MR (!!!) and accepts another image from the same situation (just the crop and the perspective is slightly different.

All in all you can say that they prrof with every single upload that they havent got the faintest idea what they do and (this is the most upsetting thing) they are not willing to provide photographers with reliable rules or train their reviewers.

We replied in their forum like that (just one part and you can read the whole locked post here (maybe they will delete it because they are no fans of democratic structures)


Quote
Quote
HiHo as you might see im quite new as a seller on Photodune but we are selling at almost all major stockagencies but what we realized here is, sorry to say that, the most absurd ever.

1: A image of a governmental building, shot from a public place without any gear like multicopters has been rejected because of missing property release. This is absurd and we sell that image even on istock, shutterstock and getty and no one of these are asking for a PR.

Who shell i ask for a PR ??

Angela Merkel????

2: it gets even more absurd!

A image very very similar to this one
http://www.axellauer.de/wp-content/gallery/hochzeitsfotografie/mg_8397.jpg

was rejected because of missing Model-Release.

Shell we ask the flowers for a signature????? Boys, its flowers, not the bride. You cant even tell if its a female, how can you tell that it is a specific person!!

thats soi dont even have words for

Right now we have 169 accepted and 20 rejected.

about 600 are still in process .

about 40.000 we have in our stock.

I am interested if photodune stays on our list of delivered stockagencies. we will see Regards axel


After some "kind but empty phrases of an Mod" we had to answer like this:

Quote
Hi there at first i want to say that this is your plattform and therefore you have the rights to set up any rule you like however they are.

Conclusion: We accept that! We upload, you accept or reject we dont care.
And now please have a closer look at some images you rejected. Remember: You rejected them because of missing Model-release!!! Qoute Photodune:

    providing signed release forms for images containing recognizable humans

And we remember one topic more: People (even in America) must accept that they might be on photos even without their explicit affirmation if they are...

   
  • not the main motive
  • or blurred (means in most cases that they are not the motive)
  •     or if they are ( dont know the proper english word) padding / attachment in photos of general charakter like streetscenes


Even if they are the full motive (but that might not be the case here) they maybe can be published without their confirmation if the picture has a state of art and in that case the personal rights of the person shown, has to step back behind the public rights for art. Or do you think photographers like Nachtwey or Curry do have MRs ??? But thats not the topic!

And now lets have a look at some photos which have been rejected:

http://www.axellauer.de/photodune-rejects/
Lets beginn with Number 2 (bridal bouquet / red flowers):

Sergey (***a meber of PD-Support-team) replied in an email like this:

   
Quote
Though the face of the person is not visible, she may be recognised by other relatively unique objects: - the dress; - the wedding ring; - the bouquet. Thats why the request for model release form is justified in this case.


The Dress??
I dont now how it works in america but in germany brides usualy do not knit their dresses themselves they buy them in shops where the same dress is available a second , and yes, unbelievable, maybe a third or a fourth time (and so on). Very individual though isnt it??

The Wedding ring??
Can you tell me the colour of the ring???

Yes?? Wow, youre a Mentalist Congratulations. I cant not even in a 100% view!
So if you even cant tell the colour, how can you tell that this is Misses XY ??

The Flowers:
Ah.Yes, they have been grown by the bride herself and she knows every single blossom by its name and in the evening when nobody listens the bride exchanges her deepest secrets with them. Very intimate relation they have.

    ---The Motive is flowers !
   --- Its Flowers we shot !
    ---We shot flowers !

Once more?? Look at the focus !!!!
Thats perfect according to american law.

Next time i will ask my MOTIV (the bouquet) if they would sign your MR. But i think it will fail because flowers have no thumb to hold a pencil.
What a bummer!

And with all the other pictures its much more absurd than in this case.

We work together with 27 international agencies including your direct competitors on the american market and not a single one asked for a MR in cases like that. Do you really believe that all of them have no idea when a MR is needed???
A little bit more What about these images you sell?? http://photodune.net/item/passengers/404429?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=jeancliclac http://photodune.net/item/crowd-crossing-over/260280?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=Lifeonwhite

These people are much much much more recognizable than on every single picture we send you!

You want to tell me that this author sended you over 30 different MRs ????
Another Sentence of Sergey:

    Axel, youve mentioned that you have about 40.000 items to be uploaded. Im looking forward to seeing your works soon!

Yes, we do. And we have rules as well and they are very simple. We deliver our good work (not only the C-Class-Stock-Stuff) only to agencies who fullfill the following:

 
  • reliable standards concerning MRs & PRs based on the law in the country they are located
  •   They accept our releaseform (sometime we make exceptions like we did with photodune)
  • They do their job as good as we do ours. That means at least correct reviewing (have a close look at the case with the governmental building)



Regards axel

PS: and one last remark concerning the rejected image with the building you first rejected because of missing PR although its governmental
This one is not governmental: http://photodune.net/item/manhattan/1452887?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=Galyna_Andrushko Does the author have a PR?? Im in doubt.



Like mentioned before:
This is the most stupid "review-situation" we had under all (meanwhile) 40 agencies we work with and every day it becomes worse with PD.
Shall i give them more chances or give them the axe??
What do you think??

Did you ever made the experience of fair conversation with PD ?

Regards axel

BTW: Now they proofed that they have a understanding of democracy which is definitelly more "J.Edgar Hoover-style" than what we europeans call democracy.
Not only that our posts are locked - our posts  have been deleted with strange reasons and we are banned from their forum.

They obviously dont like critic!
« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 04:44 by Axel Lauer »


Poncke

« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2013, 04:49 »
0
I have to agree with the reviewer, you  uploaded wedding photos, I am sure the bride will recognise herself related to the bouquet, or the ring or whatever. PD has been really great with their reviews in my opinion.

« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2013, 04:57 »
0
PD are one of the better reviewers, I rarely get a rejection there and when I do I can usually see where the reviewer is coming from. I would read their comments and take them on board for future reference.

« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2013, 05:06 »
0
I dont care about rejects in general.
I care about the stupidity of their reasons, their arbitrariness, their arrogance / ignorance and the lack of reliable rules !!

Here is one (out of many)  actual cases which shows the "highly skilled & qualified" work of their reviewers:
www.axellauer.de/absurd-pd.jpg

you can not be pregnant and not pregnant at the same time !!!

« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2013, 06:06 »
0
Alamy have a policy that photos with any part of a person visible shouldn't be sold as RF without an MR.  Its up to each site and there's not much point in complaining about it.  Why not get an MR for those wedding photos?




« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2013, 06:25 »
0
Again.....
Its not about their rule.
Its about that they  dont follow their own rules!!!!
Have a look here:
www.axellauer.de/absurd-pd.jpg

What would you think about a institution which has rules , but then do something else ??
In politic this is exactly how you define a police state - no rules where citicen can rely on!

And again....

This photographer, i bet, does not have a MR from all these 50 people :
http://photodune.net/item/crowd-crossing-over/260280?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=Lifeonwhite

What is more recognizible??
A blurred hand on a picture where the Motiv is a bouquet or a face on a photo where the person (among some others) is the motiv ?


« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2013, 06:35 »
0
Just forget it.
If they want to play safe in a special way, they can do it.
When they reject, its their loss.
But it is their decision.
It is your decision if you want to work with them or not.

In general the annoy factor when working with an agency, means a lot to me.
And nothing annoys me more than arrogance. I have stopped working with a few because of that.

Poncke

« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2013, 06:43 »
+2
LOL, if you are this upset after uploading 160 photos, you'll have a heart attack by the time you are done with your 40.000.

Play by their rules, or dont submit. Its a free world. If you want the money, you have to play, otherwise, drop them. I dont see an issue here.

And you apparently already have the same bouquet accepted, so why go nuts when the second one is rejected? Its a similar photo, move on.

« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2013, 06:47 »
+1
Don't be angry, you just lose your time and your nerves.

Absurd rejections happen to everybody, everyday.

So, take it easy, be happy!

« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2013, 06:50 »
-1


In general the annoy factor when working with an agency, means a lot to me.
And nothing annoys me more than arrogance. I have stopped working with a few because of that.

Thats the point.
There are so many german or european agencies where it is so easy to work with.
Smart, reasonable people , good support..

On th other hand US-american agencies and lets face the facts, often enoogh arrogant, ignorant and - thats the pain in the ass - same time a huge lack of knowledge and logic.

And PD is a good example for that.
Not to talk about their way to cope with critic.
Reminds me on 1996 - where i have a been as a photojournalist in Northkorea.

« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2013, 06:57 »
0
LOL, if you are this upset after uploading 160 photos, you'll have a heart attack by the time you are done with your 40.000.

Play by their rules, or dont submit. Its a free world. If you want the money, you have to play, otherwise, drop them. I dont see an issue here.

And you apparently already have the same bouquet accepted, so why go nuts when the second one is rejected? Its a similar photo, move on.

again:
-Its not one image
-I am not complaining about rejects in general
I am complaining about arrogance, stupidity and missing reliable rules and the way how PD treats photographers.


You want one more "funny cases"

Here we go:
- Picture of a boat shed photographed from a public place was rejected because of missing PR
- I asked for a review and image was accepted
- 4 hours ago i got an email and PD changes their mind - same picture again rejected

What a laugh , what a Kindergarden !!!
They seem to play "reject-roulette" over there

« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2013, 07:07 »
0


In general the annoy factor when working with an agency, means a lot to me.
And nothing annoys me more than arrogance. I have stopped working with a few because of that.

Thats the point.
There are so many german or european agencies where it is so easy to work with.
Smart, reasonable people , good support..

On th other hand US-american agencies and lets face the facts, often enoogh arrogant, ignorant and - thats the pain in the ass - same time a huge lack of knowledge and logic.

And PD is a good example for that.
Not to talk about their way to cope with critic.
Reminds me on 1996 - where i have a been as a photojournalist in Northkorea.
You seem to of missed the fact that PD are Australian.

« Reply #12 on: February 22, 2013, 07:17 »
0
* it. I thought we could venture into some good oldfashioned American bashing here.
But its not so easy when its actually Australians.

Poncke

« Reply #13 on: February 22, 2013, 07:19 »
0
Accept it or keep ranting, it wont change a thing. I have no issues with them whatsoever.

« Reply #14 on: February 22, 2013, 07:37 »
0
it wont change a thing.
I am not sure if you are right.
The best is to support good agencies and critic the bad ones.
I still carry the hope that crap dies out and good plattforms make their way.





« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2013, 07:40 »
0
You seem to of missed the fact that PD are Australian.
Why shouldnt australians sometimes be as "intelligent" than americans?
Shi* happens
« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 07:57 by Axel Lauer »

« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2013, 07:58 »
+2
If you stick at this and continue to upload you will get far more ridiculous rejections than that, I particularly like "The focus isn't where we think it should be". Well you didn't take the shot and its where I wanted it to be..........but as has been said all you do is waste time complaining about it. Just forget about it and move on.

Poncke

« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2013, 08:13 »
0
I have been through the same frustration with FT and the only thing I could do is accept it. Believe me, FT is far more frustrating. But I learned to deal with it. Thats why I am telling you, accept it and move on, its the best thing to do.

« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2013, 08:29 »
0
Obviously in any industry you will find good players and bad players.

PD in your situation, is not a suitable fit I would say. Drop them, it's not worth the aggravation.

EVERY agency has images that slipped through the review process that shouldn't have been approved. Even iStockphoto approved images with several logos in them in some cases that sold more than 10,000 times. What shall I do about it?

If any agency doesn't want my images then it shall be that way. As you are working already with 40 agencies I don't think that PD is going to make a big difference for you.

Your images look good so you shouldn't have to worry about your future success.

On the other hand, I've been trying to get into constructive communication with Clipdealer and those folks just offer one of the worst support amongst all agencies I deal with. Similar situation with Panthermedia.

Some agencies work out for a contributor - others don't.

« Reply #19 on: February 22, 2013, 08:33 »
-1
I have been through the same frustration with FT and the only thing I could do is accept it. Believe me, FT is far more frustrating. But I learned to deal with it. Thats why I am telling you, accept it and move on, its the best thing to do.

FT? Fotolia??
I deleted my account over there (even if they sold good) because this was really much tooooooo stupid.
Their reviewers cant even count to 18.
Over 300 images rejected because the "model was not of full age" , but the model was 18 since 10 Month and the reviewer just couldnt handle his calculator :-)
And then all that hassle with that arrogant and stupid support (was a german guy - so its not only americans who can be morons).

I thought it could not become worse than Fotolia - until i ended up in the hands of PD Reviewers.

Oh boy - i am so glad that i dont depend on this stock-crap.
But you know the positiv thing on it??
I can tell what i think without beeing afraid of PDs censorship.
Even if they delete my account - so what?
Missing some dollars - who cares!

« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2013, 09:04 »
0
@Click_Click
Thats right.

What really pisses me is if an agency wants exclusive material (PD as well) and then they do not provide a set of standards.
Let me quote from another Post:
Quote
Say what you want about IS (or any other top 4 site for that matter), at least they are consistent. And that's what matters the most consistency, so at least you can adjust to their standards (you obviously want to have the highest possible AR with your best selling site). And I also understand better you arguments against exclusivity now. Imagine this lack of clear set, any set of standards of inspection, topped with a search engine shakeup. It could lead to a disaster.

Thats why i never ever would become an exclusive author with PD and i really dont know why anyone else would do.
if one does he must be very desperate.

Clipdealer?
We tried too, but thats not worth it.
 
Panthermedia?
They are the next one we will give the axe!

ShadySue

« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2013, 10:59 »
0
Let me quote from another Post:
Quote
Say what you want about IS (or any other top 4 site for that matter), at least they are consistent. And that's what matters the most consistency, so at least you can adjust to their standards (you obviously want to have the highest possible AR with your best selling site).
If you have several days to spare you could read through many threads here and find lots of inconsistencies with reviews and deactivations at the 'top 4' sites too.

« Reply #22 on: February 22, 2013, 11:56 »
+1
Hello everybody
probably you face the same absurd rejects with PD the wa did.
After i tried to get some reliable advices or rules from them and all tries failed because they only answer with empty phrases all my amployees told me to give PD the axe but i always believethat people are reasonable and fair and so i tried and tried - withot any results.


How do you cope with these absurd situation??

Lets face rhe facts:
PD rejects obviosly public buildings (churches, cathedrals, governmental buildings etc) with the argument that you need a PR.
PD rejects pictures like these ( http://www.axellauer.de/photodune-rejects/ )because of missing MR , at the same time they accept pictures like these (  ) and i am sure that the photographer has no MRs
PD rejects a image of a flower bouquet with the reason that you need a MR (!!!) and accepts another image from the same situation (just the crop and the perspective is slightly different.

All in all you can say that they prrof with every single upload that they havent got the faintest idea what they do and (this is the most upsetting thing) they are not willing to provide photographers with reliable rules or train their reviewers.

We replied in their forum like that (just one part and you can read the whole locked post here (maybe they will delete it because they are no fans of democratic structures)


Quote
Quote
HiHo as you might see im quite new as a seller on Photodune but we are selling at almost all major stockagencies but what we realized here is, sorry to say that, the most absurd ever.

1: A image of a governmental building, shot from a public place without any gear like multicopters has been rejected because of missing property release. This is absurd and we sell that image even on istock, shutterstock and getty and no one of these are asking for a PR.

Who shell i ask for a PR ??

Angela Merkel????

2: it gets even more absurd!

A image very very similar to this one
http://www.axellauer.de/wp-content/gallery/hochzeitsfotografie/mg_8397.jpg

was rejected because of missing Model-Release.

Shell we ask the flowers for a signature????? Boys, its flowers, not the bride. You cant even tell if its a female, how can you tell that it is a specific person!!

thats soi dont even have words for

Right now we have 169 accepted and 20 rejected.

about 600 are still in process .

about 40.000 we have in our stock.

I am interested if photodune stays on our list of delivered stockagencies. we will see Regards axel


After some "kind but empty phrases of an Mod" we had to answer like this:

Quote
Hi there at first i want to say that this is your plattform and therefore you have the rights to set up any rule you like however they are.

Conclusion: We accept that! We upload, you accept or reject we dont care.
And now please have a closer look at some images you rejected. Remember: You rejected them because of missing Model-release!!! Qoute Photodune:

    providing signed release forms for images containing recognizable humans

And we remember one topic more: People (even in America) must accept that they might be on photos even without their explicit affirmation if they are...

   
  • not the main motive
  • or blurred (means in most cases that they are not the motive)
  •     or if they are ( dont know the proper english word) padding / attachment in photos of general charakter like streetscenes


Even if they are the full motive (but that might not be the case here) they maybe can be published without their confirmation if the picture has a state of art and in that case the personal rights of the person shown, has to step back behind the public rights for art. Or do you think photographers like Nachtwey or Curry do have MRs ??? But thats not the topic!

And now lets have a look at some photos which have been rejected:

http://www.axellauer.de/photodune-rejects/
Lets beginn with Number 2 (bridal bouquet / red flowers):

Sergey (***a meber of PD-Support-team) replied in an email like this:

   
Quote
Though the face of the person is not visible, she may be recognised by other relatively unique objects: - the dress; - the wedding ring; - the bouquet. Thats why the request for model release form is justified in this case.


The Dress??
I dont now how it works in america but in germany brides usualy do not knit their dresses themselves they buy them in shops where the same dress is available a second , and yes, unbelievable, maybe a third or a fourth time (and so on). Very individual though isnt it??

The Wedding ring??
Can you tell me the colour of the ring???

Yes?? Wow, youre a Mentalist Congratulations. I cant not even in a 100% view!
So if you even cant tell the colour, how can you tell that this is Misses XY ??

The Flowers:
Ah.Yes, they have been grown by the bride herself and she knows every single blossom by its name and in the evening when nobody listens the bride exchanges her deepest secrets with them. Very intimate relation they have.

    ---The Motive is flowers !
   --- Its Flowers we shot !
    ---We shot flowers !

Once more?? Look at the focus !!!!
Thats perfect according to american law.

Next time i will ask my MOTIV (the bouquet) if they would sign your MR. But i think it will fail because flowers have no thumb to hold a pencil.
What a bummer!

And with all the other pictures its much more absurd than in this case.

We work together with 27 international agencies including your direct competitors on the american market and not a single one asked for a MR in cases like that. Do you really believe that all of them have no idea when a MR is needed???
A little bit more What about these images you sell?? http://photodune.net/item/passengers/404429?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=jeancliclac http://photodune.net/item/crowd-crossing-over/260280?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=Lifeonwhite

These people are much much much more recognizable than on every single picture we send you!

You want to tell me that this author sended you over 30 different MRs ????
Another Sentence of Sergey:

    Axel, youve mentioned that you have about 40.000 items to be uploaded. Im looking forward to seeing your works soon!

Yes, we do. And we have rules as well and they are very simple. We deliver our good work (not only the C-Class-Stock-Stuff) only to agencies who fullfill the following:

 
  • reliable standards concerning MRs & PRs based on the law in the country they are located
  •   They accept our releaseform (sometime we make exceptions like we did with photodune)
  • They do their job as good as we do ours. That means at least correct reviewing (have a close look at the case with the governmental building)



Regards axel

PS: and one last remark concerning the rejected image with the building you first rejected because of missing PR although its governmental
This one is not governmental: http://photodune.net/item/manhattan/1452887?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=Galyna_Andrushko Does the author have a PR?? Im in doubt.



Like mentioned before:
This is the most stupid "review-situation" we had under all (meanwhile) 40 agencies we work with and every day it becomes worse with PD.
Shall i give them more chances or give them the axe??
What do you think??

Did you ever made the experience of fair conversation with PD ?

Regards axel

BTW: Now they proofed that they have a understanding of democracy which is definitelly more "J.Edgar Hoover-style" than what we europeans call democracy.
Not only that our posts are locked - our posts  have been deleted with strange reasons and we are banned from their forum.

They obviously dont like critic!


Axel, you have very very nice photos and obviously too too much time.
WThell is PD, anyway?
Another 3$/year agency? !

« Reply #23 on: February 22, 2013, 11:58 »
0
Most of the sites have tightened up their rules on model and property releases over the last few years. So finding something from a couple of years back that doesn't follow today's rules will happen at every microstock site.

Bottom line on model releases is that if you want to sell RF stock, you should have releases for anything that has shots of individuals (i.e. I'm not talking street scenes), even if it's body parts. People can be very recognizable without faces and you don't want to be on the receiving end of legal action.

When you have borderline cases - your bridal bouquet example has more of the bride showing in one case than the other - decisions could go either way. It's a judgment call. If you had a release from the bride it wouldn't be an issue.

Ranting about rules isn't going to get you anywhere if you want to sell via the microstock agencies. All of them have rules that are not to our liking some of the time and all of them apply those rules with varying consistency. It's typical for people who are new to this to get worked up, but you're going to have to decide to live with it or stop selling via the micro agencies. It's really that simple.

« Reply #24 on: February 22, 2013, 12:13 »
+1
Move on, leave this agency; after all it doesn't seem to be a great performer.

Inspectors are human and can make mistakes. I don't care. I just care when it's not a mistake but a lack of professionalty of the inspector. When I see that without being an inspector, I know his work an the rules of the agency way better than him.

tab62

« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2013, 12:30 »
+1
Why not just accept what the Micro-stock company ask you do? Just a thought...

« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2013, 14:36 »
0
PD don't have reviewers they outsource entirely asfaik, there was a thread here a long while back. I'm not saying that using reviewers from a company is entirely bad, maybe when there is a shortage, but if they use a company for all their reviewing despite giving them rules, it's not as easy to monitor.

« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2013, 05:14 »
-1
Why not just accept what the Micro-stock company ask you do? Just a thought...
as i said many many times before:
If they would have rules (even if the rule was that they only except red photos, or whatever) i would adapt.
They have no rules you can rely on.
Its like having a partnership with a schizo / psycho. They as well change their opinions and rules every day.

Axel, you have very very nice photos and obviously too too much time.
WThell is PD, anyway?
Another 3$/year agency? !

Thats right but i have for sure one character fault - i become very stubborn if people behave incorrect or unfair and what pisses me most is illogical and stupid people.
Might be my scorpio ;-)

Most of the sites have tightened up their rules on model and property releases over the last few years. So finding something from a couple of years back that doesn't follow today's rules will happen at every microstock site.

I understand that but the case i was talking about (logo of mercedes benz) is most actual!!
I estimate according to the law of my country (and accordung to human sanity) if a picture needs a MR / PR or not.
If an agency wants me to estimate according to their rules they must set up rules.
Otherwise this agency is just a bunch of unprofessionals.


Bottom line on model releases is that if you want to sell RF stock, you should have releases for anything that has shots of individuals (i.e. I'm not talking street scenes), even if it's body parts.
People can be very recognizable without faces and you don't want to be on the receiving end of legal action.

When you have borderline cases - your bridal bouquet example has more of the bride showing in one case than the other - decisions could go either way. It's a judgment call. If you had a release from the bride it wouldn't be an issue.

Do you know what the bride would tell me if i ask her for a MR ??
Something like:" Go to hell you bloody idiot. Why should i sign a MR if you want to sell a picture of a flower. Ask the flower, you moron"
And hey....... she would be perferctly right with that reply.

And if a bride wants to take legal action the judge would tell her that she better should go home, do something more useful than to waiste the courts time whith kindergarden-crap like that.

But maybe its different in USA agencies (and some australian too).
Seems like they are sitting like cowards under their desks, trying to get rid of all risks and lost their marbles - far away of any reason.

« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2013, 06:34 »
0
Welcome to the world of RF microstock.
"Yes, they are cowards". They are imagining a lot of worst case scenarios that wont ever happen.
But some will.
Like a manufacturer of glasses sue for illegal use of trademarks when photos of models with glasses are sold commercially, maybe even via a competitor.

Now, when your happy bride gets divorced in 5 years time, she sits there and talk to a lawyer and shows him the wedding pictures, and mentions that say that she has seen them on a webpage for a rosegarden in Switzerland.
Can you imagine the rest of the story?
So yes they are cowards, because, the profit margin is narrow, and there is a lot of parasites out there, that will invent very strange stories to be able to suck some blood.

Also bear in mind, that German and Scandinavian business ethics are NOT the same as in the anglo saxon world.

What you really should do is to get your legal works in order, and make an agreement with the bride about the usage of the images. You hold the copyright, but that does not mean you can copy them whereever you want.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2013, 06:39 by JPSDK »

« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2013, 11:36 »
+2
But maybe its different in USA agencies (and some australian too).
Seems like they are sitting like cowards under their desks, trying to get rid of all risks and lost their marbles - far away of any reason.

Dude.  Keep your lame-ass nationalistic ideas to yourself.  It is their policy and it has nothing to do with nationality.  I'm sure if I knew what country you are from, I could slander it too. 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
40 Replies
8434 Views
Last post June 05, 2012, 14:37
by leaf
79 Replies
11507 Views
Last post July 10, 2012, 16:40
by wut
5 Replies
1619 Views
Last post January 15, 2013, 15:55
by Dan
27 Replies
6967 Views
Last post April 21, 2014, 12:53
by Uncle Pete
23 Replies
6649 Views
Last post January 29, 2018, 10:10
by Microstock Man

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results