|
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 - Jo Ann Snover
4376
« on: February 12, 2013, 10:47 »
Very nice of you to take the time and try and fill us in on what goes on at Alamy, James. Much appreciated.
4377
« on: February 12, 2013, 10:43 »
So it took a day or two longer than I'd have liked but my imgaes are gone from GetInTravel. I received e-mail from SingleHop this morning: "Pursuant to your DMCA notice to SingleHop, the material identified in your notice has either been removed, or public access to it has been denied. Please get back to us in case you believe that the terms of your DMCA notice have not been fulfilled."I wasn't sure if they'd still have the pages but change the text to remove the invitation to download a 1600x1066 file; the pages are gone. I heard nothing back from 123rf support whatsoever - a little disappointing; perhaps they've done something behind the scenes? Given that another stock image is still on the offending site (and if they bought mine from 123rf I'm assuming they shopped there for all their images), I doubt it: http://www.getintravel.com/san-antonio-texas-united-states/caucasian-family-having-dinner-together-at-tower-of-americas-restaurant-in-san-antonio-texas/
4379
« on: February 11, 2013, 21:26 »
4380
« on: February 11, 2013, 19:56 »
I have not one second's doubt that Sean will come out of this doing very well. But I do think it's deeply chilling that an organization would remove someone's livelihood with a piddling 30 days notice - and whatever Getty's reason, they don't have to have one according to the ASA.
All the iStock boosters who see a future there assume that the other party (Getty) will act reasonably and ethically. One might reasonably assume that being as successful as Sean has been would increase the likelihood that Getty would act reasonably and ethically - given that they both stand to benefit so much from a solid working partnership.
iStock's action has clearly demonstrated that no one should feel safe - not because of how much time and effort they put in to building or boosting or promoting iStock or their portfolio, or how long they'd been a member, or whatever their sales.
I read a story about Blackbeard (the pirate) shooting some random crew member and explaining that if you didn't act unpredictably and harshly on a regular basis people might take advantage of you, thinking you were going soft.
Thinking about Fair Trade terms with respect to Rob's and Sean's termination notices it had me considering what one would want in the ASA in place of the current 30 day notice (which I think is at all the agencies in similar form). How about that a 30-day notice from the agency would only be for violating the agreement. Terminations for no reason would require a longer notice period - 3 months perhaps - so that people wouldn't be cut off at the knees. It takes time to upload your portfolio (even if it isn't 12K images) to other agencies. The termination period should take account of that reality.
4381
« on: February 11, 2013, 17:14 »
...Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
I have a copy of the one for the August 2009 iStockalypse in Calgary. The registration was separate from the liability waiver (if you kill yourself it's not our fault) and also from the MR I signed as an attendee - I was an extra in some other people's shots
Great. Would you mind quoting the text? I assume they all have the same wording.
I did several posts back - the paragraph about where the content can go.
4382
« on: February 11, 2013, 17:13 »
I'm shocked speechless. They've lynched the voice of reason, the elder of the tribe. An astounding decision.
My thoughts and best wishes go out to you and your family, Sean. I hope your comeback will be swift and sure.
I think your avatar now needs to be an animated gif Don, circling a bit  Gallows humor I know...
4383
« on: February 11, 2013, 16:50 »
If we're going to do something to at least make our views heard loud and clear by Shutterstock - which is really what everyone's concerned about, I think - I thought having a fair trade symbol might help people publicize what's going on I've put some draft fair trade logos on my blog - all opinions welcome http://www.digitalbristles.com/we-need-fair-tradeI'm going to pull my BigStock portfolio on the Ides of March (March 15th) if we don't get an opt out from the new royalty scheme
4384
« on: February 11, 2013, 15:26 »
So why did they boot Rob?
Rob said he asked them for a reason and got a return e-mail citing the ASA that gives them the right to terminate for an undefined reason "we have elected to terminate your contributor account on notice to you with no identified reason under the terms of the Agreement"
4385
« on: February 11, 2013, 15:21 »
Crikey. I can't think of anything to say that hasn't been said, but yes, everything that everyone else is saying, just wanted to add my two cents.
Go on, say it - +1
4386
« on: February 11, 2013, 14:08 »
...Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
I have a copy of the one for the August 2009 iStockalypse in Calgary. The registration was separate from the liability waiver (if you kill yourself it's not our fault) and also from the MR I signed as an attendee - I was an extra in some other people's shots
4387
« on: February 11, 2013, 13:49 »
I only attended the HQ lypse in Calgary in 2009. I seem to remember that even for mini-lypses they said in the forums that when iStock kicked in some cash for the event, they wanted the images, even from indies, to be sold only on iStock.
In my case it was in the agreement I signed "You agree that you will make all images or video recorded by you during the Event available for license exclusively from istockphoto.com whether or not you are currently or later become a non-exclusive contributor."
Is that the contributor agreement you are talking about or a separate agreement you have signed at the Lypse?
It was a document titled "iStockalypse Attendee Registration" that was specifically for the 'lypse
4388
« on: February 11, 2013, 13:21 »
I only attended the HQ lypse in Calgary in 2009. I seem to remember that even for mini-lypses they said in the forums that when iStock kicked in some cash for the event, they wanted the images, even from indies, to be sold only on iStock.
In my case it was in the agreement I signed "You agree that you will make all images or video recorded by you during the Event available for license exclusively from istockphoto.com whether or not you are currently or later become a non-exclusive contributor."
4389
« on: February 11, 2013, 13:06 »
Apparently some sort of statement is going to be released later today....
Polish that turd...
4390
« on: February 11, 2013, 12:38 »
...Always with the conspiracy theories..
Conspiracy? Who said anything about a conspiracy? To quote from A Princess Bride "I don't think it (that word )means what you think it means" Just because people have a badly thought out or mistaken or even unethical plan doesn't mean it's a conspiracy.
4391
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:58 »
OMG.
They have lost their mind.
We will be handing in our 30 day notice and giving up the crown ASAP.
You have to wonder if for some bizarre reason that was part of what iStock wanted - to get more exclusives to jump ship. So many have been on the fence for a while and uncertain about the right thing to do. This insanity on iStock's part will help make up more minds than yours, I'm guessing.
And your theory is that deleting one of the best selling portfolios anywhere will benefit them how? Bizarre is right.
It's either heads on pikes (scare off the others who might be thinking of leaving so they get compliant and "behave), drive them all out (cull the exclusives to save money on royalty payments) or they're not very bright and haven't a clue what they've just done.
4392
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:56 »
The iStock deactivation count is about to grow by 10K-ish (sjlocke's files)
Is that a joke? You realize that Sean didn't choose to do this and may actually depend on the income he and his family receive from Istock.
It's a little wry humor, but I do realize Sean didn't do this of his own volition. I know Sean (have met him in the real world anyway) and I'm sure if he thinks I'm out of line he won't be shy in telling me off - he's done it before
4393
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:25 »
OMG.
They have lost their mind.
We will be handing in our 30 day notice and giving up the crown ASAP.
You have to wonder if for some bizarre reason that was part of what iStock wanted - to get more exclusives to jump ship. So many have been on the fence for a while and uncertain about the right thing to do. This insanity on iStock's part will help make up more minds than yours, I'm guessing.
4394
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:20 »
The iStock deactivation count is about to grow by 10K-ish (sjlocke's files)
4395
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:07 »
I put a comment on your blog. My last paragraph bears repeating here. You have boatloads of talent and are not afraid of hard work. Theres only one loser in this situation and it isnt you. They are so in the weeds on this one
4396
« on: February 10, 2013, 21:07 »
Had 1 sale last week! That's 100% better than 2012.
So you had 0.5 sale in 2012?? 100% better = doubled; 100% of 2012's sales = same as; from 0 to 1 is an infinite increase - anything times 0 is 0 . As a percentage the increase is undefined is I think the way you'd say that.
4397
« on: February 10, 2013, 18:40 »
If you believe in freedom of speech, then they should be allowed to be here.
I don't when it comes to stuff like this. And any forum is bound by whatever rules those who run the place decide to enforce - heck, we've seen that in the iStock forums. No such thing as free speech there... But again, maybe its just me.
I don't think it's practical to ban admins as in general, when they come here they come to help and fix problems. There'd be this cat and mouse game of admins signing up from other computers and you don't need to produce ID to become a member here. The two agencies who have done something other than offer help are iStock and Fotoliia. Fotolia's the reason we have so many anonymous folks - Paul Cowan is now "out" from behind Baldrick's Trousers as he was able to get paid and close his a/c at Fotolia and no longer had to worry about retaliation - which in FT's case was stated policy rather than just whim. I do wish it were mandatory to have the special "stamp" for those who were staff. Tyler (Leaf) has offered it as an option so those of us here can know when we're dealing with agency staff vs. contributors. But if the members don't want to then they don't have to have it. As long as everyone knows they're dealing with agency staff so they can act appropriately I think that's the most reasonable compromise.
4398
« on: February 10, 2013, 18:32 »
I don't understand it either. From last year when I started uploading RF (I had some older RM sales - not many - while an IS exclusive)
Total Views for Jo Ann Snover : 11,159
Total Zooms for Jo Ann Snover : 84
Average CTR for Jo Ann Snover : 0.75
Total CTR for Jo Ann Snover : 0.75
Average CTR on Alamy for last month : 0.63
15 sales in that time. I think only once was there a zoom and a sale (but I don't keep close track as I really can't grasp how any of these stats tell me anything useful).
4399
« on: February 10, 2013, 17:48 »
My support ticket asking if mine is a lifetime ban or can I have my posting privileges back - from May 4 2012 - has disappeared and was never answered.
Brenda (oldladybird) sent me e-mail in September 2012 saying the ticket had been incorrectly assigned and was "buried in the ticketing system".
Since then nothing and recently the ticket disappeared. At this point - for me - it's moot, but you should understand that telling people to open a support ticket doesn't always result in any response at all.
You can try to make the whole thing seem civilized and fair, but that's just not what many of us have experienced. I can't do more than guess at why this happens the way it does, but you can't expect people who know better to accept this whitewashing effort.
I contributed in many ways in many sections of the iStock forums and being banned for life for one snarky remark about a misguided venture (Feast) seems to me that you didn't take into consideration any of my past donated time (critique forum in particular). Coming to an off-site forum where people have taken refuge from your bans and suggesting that we're not considering how hard your job is is just rich.
4400
« on: February 10, 2013, 15:28 »
I'll just leave this here...
You're cheering up a bunch of us with your talented (if black) humor. Even if it's wasted on them, it's not wasted on us And I hope you don't mind, but I shared a link to those with a FB group (i.e. it's not public). PM me if you want me to remove the links
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
