OK Zager, if you are so above board and honest, why don't you just delete every 123 account image that you have there? We were given to understand this relationship ended, but it turns out that you are using my art from 123 to support your dodgy business operation and, no doubt, the art of thousands of other people, also.
It is my opinion that continuing to host work after the relationship with the sites representing that work has terminated is evidence of complete lack of moral standards.

As well as you, Trousers, I found loads of my images on Pixmac, even on the first page after a some generic searches. As I went through my portfolio at several sites, the very probable conclusion is that they came from 123RF. As I read well, the partnership of Pixmac with 123RF ended last March, and it's almost August now. That means that they largely exceeded the grace period of 2 months. Hence, Pixmac is allegedly infringing on my copyright. What's more, they probably are still selling my images and keeping the money for themselves.

Some comparisons between the search results on Pixmac and on 123RF made me conclude that they are only offering images that have been cached larger size while actually downloaded by a buyer. This would explain why they only have the most appealing images. This is exactly what DT claims they found out about the practices of Pixmac. If so and if true, this isn't just a mistake * The scripts that accomplish such a thing don't generate themselves. Pixmac is very capable of doing it  since their site is, as far as I can see, state of the art programming.

So, Mr. Vitezslav Valka, I have to urge you to take all those presumably cached images down that you are selling probably illegally. Not only for me, but for everybody that is in a similar position. That's why I don't give you my name for now. First of all I don't like to be "followed" in a creepy way like you did with "pseudonymous", and secondly, you would get away with all this far too easily by just removing the images of one contributor while most don't probably know what is going on. It's also of no use asking the Site Admin of MSG for my IP number since I'm posting far from home and I'm moving out here in a week.

As it happens, I'm not that much into microstock any more but I work with a (European) modeling agency that is centered on RM and assignments. We have an insurance for this kind of things and legal assistance. Of course, they won't sue you for free on my behalf, since all those images were made during my microstock period and not in connection with this agency. Nevertheless, they offered me some free advice.

First, I have to make sure with all the agencies I upload to that you aren't their partner (any more). That should be a quickie since the old images of me that you sell are only on one agency more than DT, FT and 123RF. After that, we will download some of my own pictures large size in the presence of a notary public. This will in fact prove (or not) that you kept the large sizes and not just the thumbs by a "mistake". It will also prove (or not) that you are actually selling these images, not just displaying them. Maybe we have already a dormant account on your site, or maybe we haven't. Maybe we will wait for a while, or we won't. After this mini-audit, I will carefully watch on all my regular sites if I got a sale for those images. After all, there is a tiny chance that they made a mistake.

I have to be honest in that I can't afford to sue you, if wrongdoing should be proven. I won't come to Prague to see you in court. But I certainly will let deliver registered letters to your Ambassador, his Commercial Attach� and your trade organizations in Czech Republic, like the Czech Association for Business Excellence, and some joint Chambers of Commerce. You also might enjoy some exposure on the Net. Of course, none of this before having decisive proof. In that case I'm sure we can come to an agreement about indemnities for my time, the cost of my mini-audit and smart-money. I will also not sign any NDA unless properly compensated.

If this would all be one big mistake (which I doubt), of course, please accept my apologies. In the other case, you'd probably better off to remove those images ASAP.
An alternative might also be to reveal all your partners so we don't have to play detective ourselves.

Thank you.

* admin edit: libelous statement taken out

Update: I have about 800 pictures on Pixmac. Those are with a "partner program". The date of my signing up corresponds with the date signing up at 123RF.
Later, I used another nick, and my new shots are also on Pixmac with the mentioning of "Featurepics".
I think I will have to call Elena... I didn't mind a payout 1-2 per year since she seemed to be a nice lady, but I do mind she sold our soul to Pixmac behind our back.
Time to cancel my account there at Featurepics.

DepositPhotos and YayMicro are both in bed with Pixmac too it looks like. If you care about your images being protected and not thieved, I'd contact them too and tell them that you don't want your work given to Pixmac. Given that FT, 123RF, and DT have all dropped Pixmac for good reason, they should know better.

I have some confidence that Dreamstime has the resources and ability to protect my images, as they clearly have done - but I question YayMicro or DepositPhoto's ability or incentive to do this.

It seems like such a sham that Pixmac got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, and then proceeds to cast it off as a simple accident. An accident is deleting an email or dropping a beer. But "accidentally" selling our images and pocketing all the money? I call BS. No doubt they are trying to back-pedal hard now, but they've already shown their true colors. It's absolutely ridiculous that anyone would trust them now. And why did Fotolia and 123RF drop them? Yeah, exactly.

Now DepositPhotos and YayMicro needs to do the right thing and protect our work!

Signed,
- A member who does not want to be added to Facebook/Twitter/Etc.

it's nice to hear people's opinion and kind of Zager to jump into this firepit trying to answer some of the questions.. so this thread will be left open a little longer but if people keep making libelous statements it will be locked

it's nice to hear people's opinion and kind of Zager to jump into this firepit trying to answer some of the questions.. so this thread will be left open a little longer but if people keep making libelous statements it will be locked

That sounds a bit like Zager can spout anything he likes but if anyone disputes his version of events it will be deemed 'libelous'. Personally I'm inclined to believe DT's explanation and actions.

Can anyone definitively say whether 123RF terminated their contract with Pixmac or not?  I found my images there and contacted Pixmac support.  They told me in their reply to me that "Pixmac has a partnership with 123rf and features also their collections.  This partnership was not terminated and that is why you have your images at Pixmac."

So which is it??!!?    

Editing to add that I also contacted 123RF support asking them.  I'll report back when I get a reply.

If i remember well - time ago it was said  that one of two partners of PM that canceled contract has changed the decision and will stay with PM. I don't think that Dreamstime has changed their decision so it looks like that 123 is still or again PM's partner. Anyway portfolios from 123 on PM are not updated for a long time and contain many images that no longer exist as they were removed from 123.

Quote from: admin on July 22, 2011, 00:08

it's nice to hear people's opinion and kind of Zager to jump into this firepit trying to answer some of the questions.. so this thread will be left open a little longer but if people keep making libelous statements it will be locked

That sounds a bit like Zager can spout anything he likes but if anyone disputes his version of events it will be deemed 'libelous'. Personally I'm inclined to believe DT's explanation and actions.

I think this thread should be witness to the exact opposite.  People have been very free to say their thoughts on Pixmac here.  I tried very hard to remove as little as possible anywhere there was an edit (always noted with a *)  It was always just a word or two or short statement with libelous content (stating factually that an entity (person or business) is a criminal or similar when such hasn't been proven by a court of law)

update: one member requested their posts be removed from this thread.  I have removed their posts as requested (the posts are still kept, but in a hidden area)... this thread is but a skeleton of what it used to be, so if a conversation doesn't make sense, you know why.