Just deactivated all 56 of my model released images.  More to come tomorrow.

I think it would be interesting to see what people are putting in the reason box.  I'll start off with my stated reason:

"Removed to protect IP rights from being usurped by Getty and others."

"I can not risk that you might sell my photos to Google."

Question: Is there anything legal in the ASA between myself and IS allowing Getty to continue to sell my images after I have deactivated them?

Answer: There's nothing in the ASA at all about deactivating images.

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on January 14, 2013, 08:49

Quote

I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message. 

Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.

1. Do you really really believe they will still get thousands of uploads a day AFTER THE GOOGLE DEAL?

2. The deactivated images will be definitely more and more than "a couple of thousand". The count of deactivated images will constantly rise and uploading will constantly reduce, it just takes time.

3. Actually many contributors are leaving completely(from IS), cause if they choose to stay, they will be harmed more and more deep. Dropping recent income is much better than dropping the half-life income.

  I'm not deactivating because I'm p*** off, or to send a message.  I'm deactivating now to protect my photos. I don't want to quit iStock completely, because a number of things could happen to prevent further sales to Google, or any Company that intends to give our photos away for free. (lawsuits, or the company changes hands again)

  iStock brings me a lot of income, so I hope things turn around. I'll continue to upload and then deactivate upon acceptance, in hopes of a brighter day in the future.

   437 deactivated as of today. Pretty much my whole portfolio except for about 28 with no sales.

I bet that a lot of copyright lawyers are lining up to go after this deal as infringement. Hopefully, an injunction to stop further sales to Google, is around the corner.

I just deactivated 73 of my best sellers. It's scary, but I can't risk them being sold to Google and hurting their sales on the other sites. Also, I'm worried that by telegraphing a February 2 takedown, Getty might negotiate another secret deal before then.

Upload doesn't work.

The user is blocked on Dreamstime. But please note that our support didn't receive any message on this matter. So, I suggest you should notify the agencies on official channels too, instead of just posting on the forum.

I can see here 7 pages of messages on this topic, started 2 weeks ago, but how many messages have you sent to agencies? 

I contacted support on Dec 27th with link to this thread. A week later, I got a nice email thanking me for bringing it to their attention, and assuring me that they take matters of theft very seriously.

Ooops! My bad. Forgot about the google. I shouldn't have criticized such a well established photographer.

Great drumming Danny!!

I listen to my own music as well

https://soundcloud.com/cybernesco/just-for-you

Denis

Very nice Denis. I wonder how many other musicians shoot stock?

When I'm in a hurry, I listen to myself.

Drum Solo 1966

"Where is this 'vibrancy' of which you speak? I've never seen it. Mind you, I am using the original PS CS version (circa 2003 I think)."

Introduced in PS CS3. Current version is PS CS6.

I contacted Shutterstock with a link to this thread.

By the way, all of my work are composites, but all of the photographs are mine. I've never notified any agency that my work is a composite, or ever felt a need to. The goal is to not make it obvious.