Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on September 17, 2013, 11:07

"we respectfully ask that you do the same and keep specific information about your earnings private. General characterizations are fine."

That seems a bit restrictive.  Wonder what extent is too much.

Are they asking or telling?

6. Confidentiality
By submitting any Content to Shutterstock, you acknowledge that you will acquire certain confidential information, including but not limited to royalty rates, royalty payments and earnings data (collectively, "Confidential Information"). Confidential Information shall not be disclosed to any third party other than representatives, agents, attorneys, accountants, auditors and advisors with a bona fide need to know, who shall first agree to keep the terms confidential.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/terms/

It's in the TOS so talking about your "royalty rates, royalty payments and earnings data" or other things (whatever they are) would be a violation and I guess could result in the termination of your account.

Every company on the internet can change their TOS whenever they want to. Shutterstock is no exception.

Not every company says they can hold your images for 90 days after they make whatever change they make.

Quote from: tickstock on September 17, 2013, 11:02

I'd be curious to see what the reaction would be if iStock. changed their terms to add things like a 90 day lock in period (exclusives leaving and they want to stop the bleeding), using social media to market (more google drive deals), free (full sized?) comps (giving away our images), secrecy about earnings (the company is about to collapse), no opt out for sensitive use of some images (taking away our choices), etc....

To me those changes look bad for contributors.

You are so predictable

I really don't like the lock in period.  I don't like giving away full sized non watermarked comps for free (are they full sized comps).  Who likes being told they can't talk about their earnings?  I don't get the sensitive use one (but I don't think we've seen that license yet) images that depicted a sensitive use before could be used in that context I thought.  I guess now they can be used for tobacco ads.

.

.

'

.

.

.

.

.

.

/