Depositphotos tops my list - after the DP/ Shotshop deal came out! I've already deactivated about 25% of my port and plan to deactivate more soon.

When things like this come out in the open one wonders if its worth uploading to many agencies at all.  Maybe its best to stay with 3 or 4 of the most professional ones - and drop the others - so as to not place content in hands of agencies who disregard contributor interest and treat the content almost like their personal property - which it is NOT !!

Maybe one's own site (Symbiostock) is best way to go to replace income from any wayward agencies.

I would be really surprised if a mass exodus doesn't start happening soon. We just need to spread the word.

Well, I've certainly started to do that as far as my DP portfolio is concerned.  Ever since the excellent investigative report appeared in the 'Alltag eines Fotoproduzenten' (many thanks to the guys who did that, made test purchases, and uncovered the issue), I've tried number of times but failed to get any clear professional response from DP - beyond platitudes and general cut-and-paste type email replies that don't clarify anything to my understanding! 

So I've deactivated about 25% of my port already and more will go in coming days.  Obviously am not uploading any new content.

Like some others, have been asking them to remove my files from all their partner, reseller, API etc deals but got told that this will take about a month!!!  Am waiting 

On a related note, it's really surprising that no one from senior management within DP has started to engage - for instance on this forum - to address contributor concerns in any genuine way.  All the responses I got were from someone called Vicky and Stacey (no last name - no business title) which were the cut-and-paste kind.  And as this matter is slipping more and more, deactivations are probably increasing, and its appearing on social media - the article itself, Facebook, Twitter etc. - all of which is only likely to increase deactivations, and undermine future uploads, if contributor's trust will keep falling in this company.  And if it really goes viral on social media, it can affect contributors, buyers, anyone that has dealing with them.  But maybe they don't care about that either!?!

Thanks for posting this.  Kudos to the photogs in Kiev for the great work amidst a very disturbing situation!!

On Twitter:

Less than 1% photographer fee? Questions raised on #Depositphotos business practice (English translation from German)
http://goo.gl/SLDLA0

DP response that they may take a month to remove my content from their partners resellers etc certainly does not sound either professional or competent or contributor- friendly in any way, to me.

I also asked them to clarify exactly where it reads in the agreement that they can sell my content at the sub rates to their resellers for further re-sale.

Wonder if I will get clear and specific responses instead of the generalised stuff they've been feeding me to now.

This whole issue sounds entirely unfair to contributor interests.  I am wondering how a reseller can be permitted to get our files on subscription, as they are not end-users who are buying in bulk at highly discounted sub rates. They are resellers apparantly taking high markups at contributor expense.

I have asked DP to remove my files from all partners, resellers, API and any other affiliate sites of this company.

Interestingly, if one looks at the DP Standard and Extended License Agreement:

http://depositphotos.com/license.html(link)

It is clearly noted that - The Standard License allows the use of the purchased File for the creation of different kinds of items (except Items for Resale or Items for Free Distribution, where the File plays a major role in the item and adds value to it) (sic).

Its also noted that items for Re-sale require an Extended license.  Isn't Shotshop re-selling?  So why is this treated as a Standard license for payment of (sub) royalties to contributors?

So now I'm really confused??  If Shotshop sales are a re-sale (as it clearly looks to be) then WHY aren't we paid Extended license commissions?  That would seem to be the correct and fair thing, isn't it. 

Or am I missing something here??!

Thanks for highlighting .. this is a great post! I've written to DP as well and am now waiting for their response.  Have asked to clarify both commission % from Shotshop sales (different sizes), as well as opt out options from this and other partner programs.

Am looking forward to the response so that I can figure what to do with my port on DP.

 

Thanks 

Unfortunately I couldn't figure out what part of the sales come from partner sites nor indeed where the sales got made. So didn't seem to be too much clarity there!

Jan closed positive year-on-year to Jan 13  with growth coming from Photodune, Shutterstock and bits and pieces in gains at some other agencies.  Poor on Dreamstime with same dls but lower $ (subs!!).  123RF dropped big time, its been struggling for me in recent months despite new content regularly uploaded. Zilch on Alamy and next to zilch on Veer.  Bigstock had better revenue for once but RPD sucks, and how!

 
[/quote]

Whaaaat? You mean that microstock photography is subject to the same laws of supply & demand, increasing standards and international competition ... as pretty much everything else in the world? Breaking news shocker.
[/quote]


Yeah, agree .. it sounds funny.  Guess its just my cant-get-my-head-around-the-basics mood today 

 

There's no suggestion there.  Just a sad fact of life...