pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - ruxpriencdiam

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 42
1
Oh and lets not forget that is just her album, LP, Cassette, CD sales and concerts.

cassette ?
Yeah you can still buy cassettes.

2
 Yeah Ron a little math might come in handy!

Debut album released in 2006 Forbes says she is worth 200 million this year alone so how much has she made over 9 years?

Oh and lets not forget that is just her album, LP, Cassette, CD sales and concerts.

So now we have to consider products and marketing.

Taylor Swift Dolls, Toys, clothing apparel, perfumes, jewelry, hair and makeup products, food endorsements Etc.
of her goods and merchandise.

So she is easily worth Billions to an industry driven by sales and greed.

If it sells market it if it does well market another way.

You ever work in the retail business industry Ron?

Doubt it.



But that single artist alone is worth Billions not to mention marketing and advertising.

What single Micro shooter is worth billions to any micro company?

Yuri aside.

Not to forget to mention that the music industry is completely different then Micro is by miles.

The music industry will back their artists with everything they have, what micro site is willing to do that for one contributor?

None.

There's a big difference. Music Artists seem to be far more collective than us. They withhold content collectively we operate as individuals only interested in our own little world. I  am referring to the big guns. Factories never pull their content collectively.

This wasn't a collective move by the industry.  It was a single artist saying - enough is enough and refusing to add her latest work to iTunes
billions? Lol

3
But that single artist alone is worth Billions not to mention marketing and advertising.

What single Micro shooter is worth billions to any micro company?

Yuri aside.

Not to forget to mention that the music industry is completely different then Micro is by miles.

The music industry will back their artists with everything they have, what micro site is willing to do that for one contributor?

None.

There's a big difference. Music Artists seem to be far more collective than us. They withhold content collectively we operate as individuals only interested in our own little world. I  am referring to the big guns. Factories never pull their content collectively.

This wasn't a collective move by the industry.  It was a single artist saying - enough is enough and refusing to add her latest work to iTunes

4
Shutterstock.com / Re: Wow I'm really happy
« on: June 18, 2015, 10:58 »
Alrighty there Pete! ☺

But at the same time aren't you still pissing in someones Wheaties?

I mean after all this just throws out all the conspiracies that are out there.

Old images are selling for the first time. I thought they were just dead.

New uploads are getting sales next day or shortly after being accepted. And repeat DLs after that.

And some older popular images get DLs day after day. It's like they have some magic popular sign and buyers are attracted.

I'm really happy and finding that my earnings on IS have also been improving.

WOW I'm really happy...

5
General Stock Discussion / Re: Warning about Demotix
« on: June 15, 2015, 09:01 »
In the states if the lawyers see that there is some real money involved meaning they know they can and will make themselves a good cut of a winning case they will take the case pro bono and you pay nothing.

They get what is due them after the case is settled as do you the plaintiff.

6
Shutterstock.com / Re: Did SS change the search again??
« on: June 04, 2015, 10:00 »
Quote
Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 wrote:   
I'm glad it isn't just me that this is happening to - I had my first 0 download day yesterday!! At the beginning of January I had a couple of reasonable days with 10 downloads per day but I am averaging about 2 downloads a day in January whereas in December I was averaging between 6 - 16 downloads a day! Fingers crossed that it picks up again.

Quote
Yeah, that's right. 2005! ;-) A whole thread about how the search changed and earnings are down. So let me say, after 10 years, nothing changed?

Someone dug up an old thread and nothing has changed except for the years

7
General Stock Discussion / Re: An all-round crap week
« on: May 29, 2015, 09:58 »
I am not buying the holidays argument. Summer  Holidays don't start in May. It's not summer yet.
Maybe not in Ireland because of the climate but in the States Memorial Day is the unofficial kickoff of summer!

Quote
Memorial Day is a federal holiday in the United States for remembering the people who died while serving in the country's armed forces. The holiday, which is observed every year on the last Monday of May, originated as Decoration Day after the American Civil War in 1868, when the Grand Army of the Republic, an organization of Union veterans established it as a time for the nation to decorate the graves of the war dead with flowers. By the 20th century, competing Union and Confederate holiday traditions, celebrated on different days, had merged, and Memorial Day eventually extended to honor all Americans who died while in the military service. It typically marks the start of the summer vacation season, while Labor Day marks its end.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Day

8
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS is down again!
« on: May 28, 2015, 12:12 »
Six hours or more down and earlier this morning they said they were working on it and it would be back soon!

Well  I guess NOT!

9
Either way been down for well over two hours if not much longer.

Wanna bet this has a major big time effect on sales?

10
You have to ask them about it then they will send you a response.

On FB they say they are working to fix it.

Not seeing anything on their FB page or either Twitter page. OTH, people have been complaining on their bugs forum for 2 days about flaky behavior.

11
On FB they say they are working to fix it.

12
It's down then it's up then down then up.

Can get to the home page but nowhere else.

Time to find out on their FB page WTFIGO!

13
It's not just you! http://submit.shutterstock.com looks down from here.

14
Does he trolling Instagram and others? Anyway person which did not give a release has the right to sue him.
He was sued and lost then he appealed to a higher court and won, (probably cause on appeal the other party never showed)?

http://uproxx.com/media/2015/05/prince-instagram-art-show-thousands/?utm_source=FBTraffic&utm_medium=mountain&utm_campaign=CMfacebook

Quote
    Prince has been rephotographing since 1975, and has been taken to court in the past after a French photographer claimed 35 of his images were lifted by the lazy artist.

    In 2011 a US District judge ruled against Prince and the Gagosian Gallery, which displayed the photos, stating that Princes use of the images did not fall under fair use. A US Court of Appeals, however, mostly reversed the ruling two years later, stating that the majority of the works were transformative while a lower court was to review the other works.


http://petapixel.com/2015/05/26/richard-prince-is-a-jerk/

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=150415

15
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS Webinar about Referral Program
« on: May 25, 2015, 14:48 »
I used to make $100 a month with the referral program and now I make $0, so I'm not sure there is too much to explain. They killed their referral program.

According to that blog, they are going to reactivate it in some form. Blog posted on May 22.
Referral is still active but instead of .03 cents for unlimited it is now.04 cents for two years.

18
You can not shoot and sell commercial images taken on private property without a release, what are you missing?


Nobody is disputing this.

When you buy something you are not buying the copyright you are buying a product the copyright stays with the designer of the product.


Nobody is disputing this. As you know.

Your argument above, the point we are addressing concerns buildings - houses specifically. Copyright is not typically the issue with houses. The issue is one of permission. (Sometime a Property Release covers copyright - sometimes a Property Release covers a different sort of permission - eg with houses).

You will find the information you need here:

Getty Images Contributor Community - Model and Property Releases

and also here:

asmp.org

If those links are not good enough for you then why not contact Getty directly or whoever you sell via.
Man I have more links concerning copyright then you can image.

Did you not read the ARCHITECTURE link from the Us copyright office?

Quote
An original design of a building created in any tangible medium of expression,
including a constructed building or architectural plans, models, or drawings, is
subject to copyright protection as an architectural work under section 102 of
the Copyright Act (title 17 of the
United States Code
), as amended on December
1, 1990. Protection extends to the overall form as well as the arrangement and
composition of spaces and elements in the design but does not include indi
vidual standard features or design elements that are functionally required.
The term building means structures that are habitable by humans and
intended to be both permanent and stationary, such as houses and office build
ings and other permanent and stationary structures designed for human occu
pancy, including, but not limited to, churches, museums, gazebos, and garden
pavilions.


I don't need to check anything with any sites I am with I know and understand the copyright / trademark  issues.

19
Therefore if you are on the private property where that building is located it must be released from the Architect not the owner!

You are, simply, wrong. It is not a copyright issue.

But if you have any doubts then I would advise you to contact Getty directly, or whoever you are with.
Man you must really be new at this!

You can not shoot and sell commercial images taken on private property without a release, what are you missing?

When you buy something you are not buying the copyright you are buying a product the copyright stays with the designer of the product.

20
If the property is a building like a house the owner doesn't count because whoever has the blueprints drawn up for the building is the only one who can sign a release, just because you own it doesn't mean you own the copyright to it.


No. I have no idea what country you are in. But this is not the case in any European country I have ever lived and it is not the case in the USA according to www.copyright.gov.

Quote
120 . Scope of exclusive rights in architectural works

(a) Pictorial Representations Permitted.The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.


The owner of a building is the person who would sign a property release. Not the architect. The point being that a property release in this context is a permission-thing rather than a copyright-thing. Therefore the copyright of the design is normally going to be irrelevant except where there are specific exceptions. Unlike the design of, say, furniture or cars.

Also see: https://asmp.org
If you are shooting it on the property then it must be released from the architect!!

Learn to read.

Quote
which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.


The designer of any building has the original blueprints and is the copyright holder in the US!!

Therefore if you are on the private property where that building is located it must be released from the Architect not the owner!

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ41.pdf

21
If the property is a building like a house the owner doesn't count because whoever has the blueprints drawn up for the building is the only one who can sign a release, just because you own it doesn't mean you own the copyright to it.

Same with cars.

Same with furniture.

Etc.

22
General Stock Discussion / Re: How diverse are microstockers
« on: April 21, 2015, 10:56 »
I am not asking exact numbers here just trying to see where we all fall in as a majority.

Do we all make it as middle class or are we in the upper or lower income levels.

JHCFMFA!!!!!!!!!

I have asked Tyler to delete the thread.

Quote
OK Tyler since no one understands what the thread I started is about I am requesting it be deleted thanks.

23
General Stock Discussion / Re: How diverse are microstockers
« on: April 21, 2015, 07:33 »
I just answered as my totol microstock money.  There doesn't seem to be anyway to change it.
And I have no option allowing me to change this.

24
General Stock Discussion / Re: How diverse are microstockers
« on: April 21, 2015, 07:32 »
You are asking for income on a microstock forum. That should give it away right there.
And what are you telling anyone?

No one not even I will know who voted and what they voted.

So if you voted less then $25,000that could be anything from nothing to $25,000 which is pretty much 25,000 possible incomes and no way for anyone to determine what anyone is making.

It is to see what income levels we are all from. They are just income brackets

crap I know of at least one person who should be answering  anywhere from $100,000 - $250,000 if not more if they tell the truth and like I said no one even I will know who voted what.

25
General Stock Discussion / Re: How diverse are microstockers
« on: April 21, 2015, 06:55 »
Not just from microstock.

This is the yearly income from everything micro be it PT or FT, and your regular job if you have one.

Notice I did not say yearly income from microstock?

That should give it away right there.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 42

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle