|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Noedelhap
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 90
151
« on: February 13, 2023, 08:33 »
Companies are legally permitted to ask for your identification and there are laws on how this personal information is stored and for how long.
Depositphotos is not my favorite agency for various reasons, but what you're trying to implicate here does not make any sense.
But yeah, good luck on your legal proceedings and proving tax fraud, I'm sure your lawyer(s) are thrilled to have you as their customer. How much have you spent so far on your lawyers?
152
« on: January 29, 2023, 10:05 »
Thank you Noedelhap
I'm so sorry for my ignorance. But it's the basic meaning of this ASCRL that I don't understand.
From my google search:
ASCRL, The American Society for Collective Rights Licensing, Inc., is a 501(c)(6) not-for-profit collective management organization (CMO) for visual art authors and rights owners. We collect royalties and distribute them to our members based upon representation agreements that we have with other collecting societies around the world. Our intention is to provide you with an ongoing revenue stream from reprographic funds because you are an author or rights owner in visual work.
ASCRL works to maximize the return to rights holders and minimize collection and distribution expenses. ASCRL is the only author and rights holder created CMO that is a 501(c)(6) not-for-profit organization in the U.S. We are on your side working to help you sustain your businesses and improve your livelihood at no cost to you.
ASCRL is managed by its board of directors: Michael Grecco, Eugene Mopsik, Jeffrey Sedlik, John Simson, Esq., and James Silverberg, Esq. All directors serve, in their capacity as directors, as volunteers without compensation. The current board members have extensive experience and knowledge in the area of collective rights management both here in the United States and around the world. Eugene Mopsik also serves as ASCRL's Chief Executive Officer. James Silverberg, Esq., also serves as General Counsel to ASCRL and works on ASCRL business affairs.
I am not a US citizen, and I have never asked anyone to claim my interests in America.
Why did they give me $10 through Alamy? For what reasons and what merits?
Be patient please. tank you again
No problem. I'm not exactly sure why you have received it as a non-US citizen. In that case I think it's best to ask Alamy support, they might be able to explain it in more detail.
153
« on: January 28, 2023, 09:00 »
The American Society for Collective Rights Licensing.
Google is your friend.
154
« on: January 20, 2023, 05:39 »
That would be good because earnings are nowhere where they used to be.
155
« on: January 20, 2023, 05:35 »
Pond 5 is very happy to give out discounts and paying those out of your pocket.
156
« on: January 15, 2023, 12:39 »
Toothless.
You say toothless, I say criminal and crooked.
157
« on: January 15, 2023, 07:12 »
Can you show some examples? I think most 3D-style vector illustrations are done with skillfully applied (mesh) gradients. I haven't checked out the new 3D / material effects, but it seems to me that those, or any vector with raster effects would not be accepted.
158
« on: January 11, 2023, 13:59 »
Or maybe not. It's been two days and the previous 25 cent sales remain (although I don't see any new ones). Wouldn't the previous withholding tax be put back towards my sales? Anyone know?
Previously withheld taxes do not get added back into your account after a valid tax form is completed. You will need to include the withholdings when you file your taxes at the end of the year.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
I see. It would be nice to have a reminder before the year starts since other places keep the tax treaty info for years.
As far as getting money back from the IRS when I'm in Canada, I'd probably have more luck suing Adobe for the money (in other words: it ain't going to happen).
I received an email reminder from Adobe titled: "Your W-8 tax form will expire on the 31st of December" on November 15th.
159
« on: January 07, 2023, 05:33 »
It's pointless, he won't read it, much less respond to it.
160
« on: December 19, 2022, 17:38 »
@Justanotherphotographer
Thank you
I live in Romania and we are required to have invoice with each client. And since I can not make an invoice with the each client of the canvas since I don't have access I have to generate an invoice with the platform canva instead for each payout they send. And the invoice required to have all the info of the company.
But Canva isn't a "client" in the sense that you're doing a job for them. You're selling your content on their platform for which they pay you a commission, or royalties. And as such, an invoice (for services rendered) shouldn't be necessary.
161
« on: December 10, 2022, 09:07 »
I don't understand the map thing. What do I care in which country my stuff gets sold? It's ever changing so it doesn't do anything statistically, it's not useful for any market research...at best it's just a visual gimmick used as dashboard filler.
162
« on: November 26, 2022, 05:54 »
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection. No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?
Yes the stunt was offensive, but only because they thought we contributors love to give stuff away for a measly $8 to be featured in a free collection... Oh, that's not what you meant?
No, that's not what I meant at all. I meant that it's one thing to give away 1-10 videos for $8, and another thing to give away 200-1000 videos for $8. So it makes no sense to give a few videos, but there are 1000, because. 8x1000=8000 dollars.
If 1000 videos cannot gather at least 36 downloads of $28 in a year, then yes, giving them away for $8 is an okay deal. But then you probably have some quality issues with your portfolio to worry about.
What is the size of your video portfolio? How many videos do you sell per year?
You probably did not know, but adobe takes into its free collection only the video that has not been sold even once in the last year.
Perhaps you want to say that all your videos are sold within a year. Which I highly doubt.
I have 500+ videos. And about 100 video sales I think, 7x 70, 40x 20-28 range and many below 20 all the way down to 2.80. So they definitely did not all sell, I have a couple of strong sellers and many duds, but Adobe also nominated strong sellers that have been sold at least once this year. So giving up those videos would be a bad choice.
163
« on: November 24, 2022, 18:27 »
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection. No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?
Yes the stunt was offensive, but only because they thought we contributors love to give stuff away for a measly $8 to be featured in a free collection... Oh, that's not what you meant?
No, that's not what I meant at all. I meant that it's one thing to give away 1-10 videos for $8, and another thing to give away 200-1000 videos for $8. So it makes no sense to give a few videos, but there are 1000, because. 8x1000=8000 dollars.
If 1000 videos cannot gather at least 36 downloads of $28 in a year, then yes, giving them away for $8 is an okay deal. But then you probably have some quality issues with your portfolio to worry about.
164
« on: November 23, 2022, 06:36 »
And no, Adobe was very clear. This is the EXACT text of the message:
The text said:
You've got X eligible assets that could earn up to X upfront if seltected for the free selection. No one expect you thought he'd definitely get the possible maximum amount, not for photos, not for vectors and not for videos.
1. We are not in court.
2. This marketing stunt greatly offended the authors who agreed to participate. If Adobe initially planned to accept 0 or several videos from people, you need to write about it. Then most of the authors would have responded by refusing to participate in the program.
3. Are you an Adobe lawyer?
Yes the stunt was offensive, but only because they thought we contributors love to give stuff away for a measly $8 to be featured in a free collection... Oh, that's not what you meant?
165
« on: November 17, 2022, 08:06 »
It's been two slow weeks, but it's picking up again for me.
166
« on: November 15, 2022, 06:11 »
This month was bad, -43% compared to last year. The downtrend is now indeed more visible. I've almost reached the low of Jan 2021 (but then it was an uptrend): 
167
« on: November 06, 2022, 13:57 »
I plotted an Excel graph showing my revenue development throughout the years of both Adobe and Shutterstock. It paints a clear picture of who came out on top: 
168
« on: November 02, 2022, 04:39 »
Yeah, it's only if payments are returned due to a wrong Paypal address.
By the way, we can now get paid in other currencies than USD, at much more reasonable conversion rates than Paypal's!
169
« on: October 23, 2022, 10:36 »
All you need is a single 28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
What are you talking about? Once you lock your clips in the free section, you cannot sell it for $28 anymore for at least 1 year.
There is no evidence that enabling free assets results in more sales of your regular portfolio. MAYBE some customers purchase other clips, but not necessarily from YOUR portfolio. So the only real winner here is Adobe, not the individual artist.
"Can Adobe offer Free collection content in paid offerings?
Yes - content in the free collection can be offered by Adobe to customers for free or for a fee (e.g., as part of a subscription or enterprise contract). "
This simply means THEY can monetize the free content, not you. You will only get $8 for the whole year.
170
« on: October 23, 2022, 04:43 »
All you need is a single 28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
And we will sell it for $28, and we will get $8 for participation in the program. One does not interfere. Plus advertising portfolio.
What are you talking about? Once you lock your clips in the free section, you cannot sell it for $28 anymore for at least 1 year. There is no evidence that enabling free assets results in more sales of your regular portfolio. MAYBE some customers purchase other clips, but not necessarily from YOUR portfolio. So the only real winner here is Adobe, not the individual artist.
171
« on: October 20, 2022, 11:58 »
how come this stock still exist ? and the guy is not in prison ?
Because no one is actually taking action and suing him. People are waiting for over a year and are just letting it slide. That's how scammers get away with scamming, because no one is doing anything.
172
« on: October 20, 2022, 05:07 »
Haha, $8 to give your nominated clips away for a whole year? Only short-sighted contributors might take that easy-money. But they're shooting themselves in the foot.
All you need is a single 28 sale to earn more than what you get for 3 years in the free collection.
173
« on: October 13, 2022, 06:18 »
Are you sure it's 60 USD and not another country's dollar?
Edit: something seems off in the display of these sale prices. Last month I apparently had a "$3,900" sale with $0.38 commission
So either the currency is displayed the wrong way (it used to be other currencies) or the dollar amount is off.
The $3,900 is now labeled "$3,900.00 COP", or Colombian peso. This would convert to 0.85 USD. So the $0.38 commission is correct.
174
« on: October 13, 2022, 06:12 »
It is, but it could be an anomaly. Let's wait and see. Right now it looks my yearly revenue will be about the same if not slightly more (+10%) than last year.
175
« on: October 13, 2022, 05:26 »
I don't know, it seems pretty steady to me. Some seasonal ups and downs, but no major dips for me. See below my plotted monthly revenues starting from January 2021 until now. 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 90
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
