|
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 - gnirtS
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 38
551
« on: December 08, 2020, 11:04 »
If you only claim here SS will continue do it. They will claim some tech glitch "bla bla bla" again and still having sales with 100% profit. I think you should go for legal actions. BR
Legal and they're very upset about bad comments on Twitter and Facebook (public, customer facing side). Might want to consider TrustPilot too.
552
« on: December 07, 2020, 20:09 »
The T&Cs allow for retention up to 2 months before an item is removed. But also, if the name has gone, its possible the thing cant actually be bought if someone tries to go through with it. b. Shutterstock shall use reasonable efforts to cause Content removed from Shutterstock Websites to be removed from the websites of any Shutterstock affiliates (including co-branded websites)
553
« on: December 07, 2020, 08:14 »
Interesting they seem to be spending more resources making sure people don't publish earnings than they do with stolen portfolios.
554
« on: December 07, 2020, 05:51 »
Isn't the timing interesting, just a few weeks to go before everybody goes to Tier1 earnings?
Why wasn't he notified a year ago?
Seems like they are trying to anticipate the huge public criticism they will soon receive by using a scapegoat to warn others.
It does look like damage control before an event they know (and have calculated) is going to generate a huge backlash initially. They'll bank on it passing eventually just like it did in June but initially they're preparing for a very bad press for a few weeks. This does seem to be the "new regime" tactics - people with accounts going for criticism of the policy change and so on. Their entire business practice has gone from fairly relaxed to increasingly strict and intolerant of any dissent. Its all about public image.
555
« on: December 04, 2020, 14:35 »
what is the process they do to transfer the rights? What documents do they ask for? Thank you in advance! [/quote] The one i agreed to was a few years ago so might be different but it was all done via email (which in most countries is sufficient as a contract). They also requested the raw, unedited footage which is fair enough, free from compression artefacts, easier to grade and so on. I wasn't asked about similar footage, simply that it be removed from elsewhere (which wasnt hard as it was on 1 other site and had never sold) At the time i thought it was the right option and for that clip, still do think that.
556
« on: December 03, 2020, 19:58 »
Ive had this happen twice.
Once was a clip that had made about $50 total in 3 years so a very easy decision to get rid of it for a lot more money than it would likely ever make. I still cant work out why anyone would want it.
Second was my most popular clip thats pulled in thousands (and continues to do so) so i said no.
557
« on: November 21, 2020, 19:10 »
Its one of stocks monthly mysteries - how some people get their SS payout redirected at the appropriate time.....
Except usually they do it at the end of the month or just after depending on day of the week. This one is unusual because its so early. Are you using selective memory? SS has on the forums answered a number of times, they were aware of no hack. Which means nothing. Most people aren't aware of a hack (or claim they aren't) until something MAKES them aware (such as 123RF finally going public this month from March). They maybe unaware, maybe lying or maybe no hack. But something is causing this to happen every single month going back years using exactly the same MO every time. Artist said he used the same password on more than one site and he uses stock submitter. That isnt the case by the majority of people this happens to. It's easy to go with the public opinion, with no basis in fact, and blame SS for lying, being dogs or for having been hacked, but they won't admit it. Because generally with IT breaches most people who are breached don't find out until much later than the actual incident. Its far more common than finding out immediately. They also have woeful IT security infrastructure and systems buyer security side. Ultimately this has happened pretty much every month going back several years all using the same procedure - mass spam to hide a payout change. Every single side says its not their end causing it and they cant all be correct.
558
« on: November 21, 2020, 06:39 »
I am suddenly getting tons of spam emails and in between those emails I saw that my Shutterstock payout address has been changed.
I do not share my passwords with anyone.
The only third party Shutterstock login I used is Stock Submitter. Is this the culprit?
Is my email account also hacked?
This happens to people on a monthly basis on SS but as far as i can tell not other stock sites. (Search their forum for example). Usually it happens right near the end of the month though, just before payout dates. It always seems to follow the format of the email address getting huge amounts of spam to try to hide the payout address changed email being spotted. Are you using the same password (or variants of) across multiple sites or for the email? How long have you had the shutterstock password? Nobody has ever got to the bottom of *HOW* it happens but people usually claim their SS password is unique and lots arent using third party submitters. Shutterstock themselves claim theres no breach their end but who knows if thats true or not (they may not even be aware). I dont think your email is breached - otherwise there'd be no need for the spam because they could just log in and delete the payout change email. Thats assuming you use a different password for the email than the stock site? Its one of stocks monthly mysteries - how some people get their SS payout redirected at the appropriate time..... Of course, if they introduced 2 factor for account changes it would stop this.
559
« on: November 19, 2020, 07:34 »
Between the lottery of content acceptance and those pathetic low royalties my only question is why would anyone of sound mind even care about anything related to Shutterstock?
People that rely on or receive a large chunk of their income from Shutterstock might care?
560
« on: November 17, 2020, 12:26 »
They did the right thing only storing them as MD5 really ... the hash still has to be brute-forced to figure out the password, which is a slow process. So ... now your contact info is out there, like it wasn't already.
I almost enjoy when these things happen, even when it's my own account. These gentle reminders are good to change passwords and to not use the same one for everything.
They say MD5 but no idea if salted or not which makes a difference. Ultimately if its not a password susceptible to dictionary attacks, IF the hashing is properly implemented its no problem. But in so many cases it turns out the implementation was useless.
ICO in the UK regularly prosecutes and fines private companies for failing to secure data (although seems the government is exempt...). Look at TalkTalk, British Airways etc.
561
« on: November 15, 2020, 07:31 »
Another incident highlighting why nobody should reuse passwords.... Why . none of these sites offer 2 factor authentication i'll never know... There seems to be no penalty for these companies allowing hacks to happen, Depends where they're located in the world. In the UK that would be an ICO breach and automatic fine relative to earnings.
562
« on: November 08, 2020, 09:22 »
Something else to consider is Shutterstock do similar - a free trial.
But reading TrustPilot and the buyer/stock creator Facebook groups and forums its very clear a very large percentage of new "customers" sign up for this trial with absolutely no intention of paying or becoming regular contributors. They openly admit they'll take whats needed with the trial and wont need to sign up with ongoing payment.
AS have to be very careful this is happening - if free images ARE available they need to be small in number and arguably, the ones less popular to at least provide an incentive to sign up. Giving away your best stuff for free is never going to encourage regular customers.
563
« on: November 08, 2020, 08:23 »
Another issue that doesn't seem to be touched on is the standard customer "base".
Reading Trustpilot and the end user Facebook/stock groups a *lot* of these people subscribe to the 1 month trial with no intention of ever paying for it after that. They take what they need and that's it.
Dangling a carrot to lure people in is one thing but its counterproductive if everyone takes the carrot and never comes in.
Long term wise for a business, thats not good.
564
« on: November 07, 2020, 21:15 »
A problem would be if a popular image is added to adobe free then, OK Adobe pays for is use. *BUT* given that image is now free to anyone, the chances are it'll never sell again on *any* agency so you lose all the income from it from everywhere.
566
« on: October 30, 2020, 21:55 »
Q1 2021 is going to have bumper revenue as everyone starts on 15%.
567
« on: October 30, 2020, 19:16 »
Is anyone getting any videos accepted or is it not worth the bother submitting? I often have those rejections due to noise in clips too.
I upload the clips then up to 5 times in a row without chaning them, most of them get accepted in one of the five tries... some rejections are really stupid
That's kind of what i do, the reviews aren't reviews. Im sure its a random decision of accept/reject to keep the size of of the review queue down. I have the files on a co-hosted server so i just type 1 line and it reuploads in seconds so no real effort needed to resubmit. Generally 3 times and everything gets in. Same for images.
568
« on: October 30, 2020, 19:13 »
I think this thread has accidentally stumbled on how to not get the ridiculous focus rejections.
Just put the word "blurred" in every description.
569
« on: October 22, 2020, 05:37 »
Interesting.
Years ago when Shutterstock used to release figures the high 80%s had never sold. I suspect thats higher now they're cramming their library with low quality snapshots.
The video percentage is amazing - approx 97% of videos never sold.
570
« on: October 21, 2020, 21:58 »
Against the terms maybe but policing it is going to be hard.
If anyone can sign up for a free collection with no real vetting theres nothing stopping them using those free images to upload elsewhere.
It already happens a lot with stuff taken off Unsplash and so on.
I just cant see how giving full resolution free *good* images, in large numbers per day isnt going to get abused in similar ways.
571
« on: October 21, 2020, 13:32 »
I wonder how many people will take these free images the reupload them to this and other sites as their own to try to sell them.
This is going on at "another major agency" quite a bit at the moment.
What controls/checks are there the images and licences arent being misued?
572
« on: October 20, 2020, 07:36 »
A thread has appeared on the Shutterstock Contributors Worldwide facebook group. A guy posting saying he's reached the submission limit for videos "again" and asks whats causing it. He includes a screenshot. All the titles have videoblocks in them, a varied range of clips. Suspiciously so in fact. Someone else has done searching and found the original owner of some of those clips on there who confirms its stolen. So this guy is stealing off videoblocks and uploading to SS as his own work. What we cant find is his portfolio on SS as its not in the screenshot and the name is common. Anyone fancy some detective work? ( https://www.facebook.com/groups/1686048705011055/permalink/2835310756751505/?comment_id=2835451206737460&reply_comment_id=2835568046725776 ) Edit:- 2 other videos are taken from an author called "aerocaminua" who has a VB and SS account.
573
« on: October 17, 2020, 06:28 »
By nature of my job i know quite a lot of SS contributors. Most are in the high hundred to low thousands of dollars a month bracket.
I dont know a single one who isnt doing at least 50%. And they'd all in in the level 3 video or level 5 images bracket.
Video took a double hit with the pay cut and the introduction of ultra cheap packages so sub dollar commissions. It'll be a triple hit in January when going back to level 1 because of the relatively low volume of sales in video vs the tiers.
Image wise im level 5 and for example subs have gone from 0.38c to an average RPB of 0.21c. And for many people subs make up a large proportion of sales.
574
« on: October 14, 2020, 14:30 »
If selected, can contributors opt out?
Many of us have some media that sells very well, regularly on many sites.
We certainly wouldn't want the main paid images given away for free anywhere as it'll clearly affect sales.
575
« on: September 30, 2020, 19:24 »
https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.shutterstock.comWell its not doing them a lot of good - im not sure there are companies on there with a lower rating - its certainly the lowest ive ever seen. 1053 reviews at the time of writing that and 93% are "bad". Most of it isnt even angry contributors - its angry buyers. And thats MUCH more of a problem for a company.
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
