As a contributor, I can't complain. 

You will if the price increase is too much, and your revenue goes down.

The fact is that Getty has been a horrible stock to own for years, and the rise of microstock is only a part of that.

IS up 16%.

My earnings have been very constant over the last three months. Up about 5-10% each month.

There is a link in one of those threads to this one here with your dismissal and maunger's as proof that the amateurs have won.  Go back and listen again.  Everywhere Harlan Ellison says "writers" substitute the word "photographers" in your mind.  Everything he says will apply just the same.  Photographers that give their stuff away or sell it too cheap make life tough for everyone else, and make life tough for themselves when they decide it is time to charge "real" rates.

You're right I dismissed it too quickly, mainly because the title of the thread was so far from what the topic actually was. Yet I take issue with both what you say. Ellison does represent the typical old-time photography pro that hasn't embraced the current trend toward high volume, low price images.

There is a huge fundamental difference between writers like Ellison and photographers. There never was large barrier to entry into the writers market, nor was the production cost high. For photography there was. Slide film, large format, etc were a barrier to entry into the market that allowed photographers to charge very high prices. With the advent of the digital format this is no longer the case. Yes, you still need to have the skills but anyone with a camera from walmart can now learn the skills and be taking quality stock images. What you're seeing now is a market shift from high cost-low quantity market that was necessary to support the high costs of production from film, to a low cost-high qunatity market for digital.

This is basic evolution. The pros at dpreview that are supposedly complaining will either have to adapt or go extinct. What I find fascinating is the statement that "amateurs have won". Whoever is is saying that obviously isn't taking photographs that are so far above what the amateurs are producing as to justify the price. It's more a reflection on the quality of their own work, rather than a reflection of the market as a whole.

I know my idea will get lost in the IS thread but here is how I'd fix the problem:

Algorithm: For the first month the image is available for download you make the value given to the dl/mo variable equal to the corresponding value on an exponential growth curve. So the first download would be worth 0, second 1, third 2, forth 4, fifth 8, etc. This value would have to be normalized according to whatever value you give to other secret variables in the best match algorithm.

The algorithm would make it cost prohibitive to download the image enough to game the system, while allowing truly good images to shine. After the first month the algorithm could go back to what it was before. Criticisms welcome.

Carolyn from photoattorney.com has repeatedly posted that there has never been a US case showing the need for a property release.

There hasn't been a successful reported case, that right. But that doesn't mean they haven't tried. The case that comes to mind is Rock and Roll Hall of Fame v. Gentile. The photographer ultimately won the case, but remember he most likely had very large legal bills after it all.

I'd also like to point out that it pisses off clients when they receive cease and desist letters because a photo they used in advertising campaigns was taken without permission, whether or not a release was legally required.

Do I think property releases are stupid, yes. However, I'm a cautious person and I can see someone eventually being successfully sued for conversion on this issue, particularly in the 9th circuit.

Does anybody know the legal base behind all these property releases?

Model Releases are required for several invasion of privacy torts. Property releases are required for other, more questionably applicable, torts as well as copyright/trademark.

A good website for you is: http://www.danheller.com/model-release.html#8.2 Please Note that Dan Heller doesn't take the conservative route when it comes to releases. He also only considers copyright/trademark and those not the only ways you can be sued for photos of property (both real and personal).

If you really want to learn about them I would suggest Prosser and Keeton on Torts (Hornbook). The law on property releases is not settled and varies from state to state, and country to country.

It's not insane. The photo doesn't show that you are shooting from public land. If you're standing on private property (which is what the photo implies) then you need a property release.

last couple of hours seems than none of the links are working.
It look like a server problem.

website works fine for me, and I'm not a big fan if the site.

Photos accepted at SS are being rejected at IS for that?  I look and I see nothing.  Its really annoying because I'll have some photos accepted that are less exciting but the narrow-minded reviewer cannot look past these phantom 'pixels'  to see the better picture.

I'm just going to continue to upload them with minor tweaks until they get accepted, because its a bit ridiculous.

Yes, and because you don't see it, then it must not be there.

Just discovered more best match mysteries. Search for the word "trashed" and under best match the same artist appears several times on the first page but sorted under downloads and the results are far more varied. If D/L per image is taken into account for best match then shouldn't the results be simular to the download sort?

Sorry, I thought we were talking about dl/mo. 

The suspicion was strong, given that the photographers concerned used the same subject matter props and models, that they were in fact the same individual - which is a direct violation of istock policy.

Ah...didn't know that.

....To be honest they were rather silly downloading every single image they uploaded straight way. It makes it very obvious.

Common trait of people who game (or cheat) systems, they are greedy and their greed leads to their demise.