Whatta...?!
http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=33160

In an alarming new update to its user agreement released this week, PayPal has announced that it will assert copyright ownership over all intellectual property of anyone who uses its payment services.

�When providing us with content or posting content (in each case for publication, whether on- or off-line) using the Services, you grant the PayPal Group a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any and all copyright, publicity, trademarks, database rights and intellectual property rights you have in the content, in any media known now or in the future. Further, to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, you waive your moral rights and promise not to assert such rights against the PayPal Group, its sublicensees or assignees. You represent and warrant that none of the following infringe any intellectual property right: your provision of content to us, your posting of content using the Services, and the PayPal Group�s use of such content (including of works derived from it) in connection with the Services.�

If I've rejected you, please feel free to reply back to me and ask for details.  A lot of people already do that and I think it's a smart way to deal with the rejection.

I already did, long time ago, before this thread. I got reply but I still didn't get any details which could help me know what you are looking for. But as you said...

I recommend you don't invest too much time trying to understand us yet.  We're still small and still changing rapidly.

The above plus three rejections (applied twice plus email contact) is enough for me to stop trying again. However my friends (who don't know english that well) are still asking me what they should prepare to show you. I have no idea what to tell them...

"Photos need to be well shot with commercially usable content and current styling."

What that tells people? We know all agencies want that. Not any exceptional info here. I don't see any detail helping. I tried twice showing you different work and still don't understand what are your needs. Even if I'd change my style in future (it's natural like trends come and go), I don't know what you preffer to be presented for your needs.

iStock may no longer the leader in the stock business, but I wish them to be back to leading ways again, to go head to head with Shutterstock.

If they become profitable again, the Contributors also earn, and everyone is happy and blessed. 

I don't think I could trust them ever again... Not after what I experienced here. And it's not only me.

Years ago my wedding image was in wide usage on other photographers galleries as their work. I contacted stocks and they said it's forbidden to use my work as their. They can use it on their site, yes, but not like they are authors, they have no right to say they did this work. You can take steps in that case and earn some money for breaking the law For sure your image must be deleted from that galleries if you wish so.

Frak you !

Love it!

Where's my angry stick!? 

Looking for this one?   

Now they offer unlimited upload, few days offer. It still doesn't encourage me and my friends as watermark is still unavailable. They need more time to learn some (obvious) things...

I'm not sure if I understand it - is it some scam or iS really sends that email to people? 

These greedy companies want size. Like the D800, a huge image for .38 cents attracts more buyers but we get nothing more. Scott Braut was clear about this. DO NOT DOWNSIZE, he has said, it increases your chance of sales. Yet there is no benefit, really, for photographers. If I make 5 more .38 cent sales per month because I have super large images, does that pay for my camera? FK NO!

When I was starting with micros, years ago, people uploading to SS suggested me to downsize files as you say. After some time I decided to upload only large files to SS as there were ODDs and SoDs. I was hoping to increase my earnings with that a lot. To be honest I didn't notice any spectacular increase. In a fact I still work harder and harder to keep the same level of sales. How much more work I'd need to do to make my income 3x, 5x more? Regularly? Large files is not the key - the lesson is done.
I've found it useless to sell my oryginal size work for subs. (still talking ab.SS as I don't sell on other micros anymore), so I now must admit, that people were right. Downsizing files is better option if you want to sell it with subs on SS. In other way it is not worth the effort anymore. Make oryginal size available on your own website (with fair pricing) or other websites where you can expect high price for licence.

We are selling RF! Subscription? Large size, oryginal, full res? Not any more. Not in my case.

Now I'm waiting for the minuses from people who say: "all I care is what I see in my payment day."

Every king can loose his crown fast...

I wouldn't treat it to much seriously.

What says agreement that you approved when joining agencies?

On their forum you can clearly see that 2010 for almost everyone was the last period when people got good income. After 2010 and again in 2012 it got down a lot (even 50% less). Worth to read there to see what happened then.
It won't get better anymore. In next two-three years we can expect to see 100 mlns images in Alamy gallery crossed. You know what it means for us, right?
Who wants to bet?


And about sales. I still get them regularly, just worrying thing is that they didn't increase with my gallery growing (3-4 times bigger since I got that sales level).