Quote from: Graffoto on November 30, 2011, 19:51

Maybe what we need is a 'self destruct' algorithm.
Images would need to have some sort of invisible chrono tag built in so that after a certain license period expires (one year?), the image becomes unusable.

Obviously that would only work on electronic copies, if you make a plate from a file that would still exist. If your tag could be set for the duration of the license it might be acceptable in more traditional agencies, like Alamy, but not for RF.

Your point about making a plate is valid, but seriously how many micro buyers are going to go to that trouble? The point here is that we need better protection from the 'information wants to be free" mindset.

Just for fun, let's say we can embed a suicide pill into our digital files. The micro model would change to accommodate this new feature with new rate structures, just like they do now with an extended license. Only need a year of use? The base rate applies. Need two years, three? Next rate structure applies and so forth.

Maybe what we need is a 'self destruct' algorithm.
Images would need to have some sort of invisible chrono tag built in so that after a certain license period expires (one year?), the image becomes unusable.

The "incentive problem" is a fallacy, and you can use it in both directions:

If all you have to do is make one successful IP creation and live off of its royalties, etc... why would you ever bother to produce more stuff? You're already a millionaire off say, a movie. You're life is secure, why risk anymore money on creating other things? After all... it's a financial risk with no guarantee of success, even with tons of IP laws, you can still lose big.


It is a fallacy? Why, just because you say it is? No one needs fashion. All they need is something to keep them warm. Want is a different story.
Many peoples lives depend on medications. It is a totally different situation.

Large corporations like big Pharma, have thousands of employees and shareholders.
They have to generate huge amounts of money just to keep going.

You left out a huge part of the equation: Greed and Ego.
Use your movie example. Let's say you make a few mill off of a hit movie. First off all, unless you are a shrewd investor that money will be burned through in several years time. But we all know, once you have a little success, most everyone wants more. That is where greed and ego come into play.

Lets say someone comes to you with a screenplay and you like it.
Are you going to change a few lines and go ahead with the movie production without buying the rights to the original screenplay?
No? Why not? Oh, maybe because you will you get yourself sued to the ends of the earth?!

IP laws exist because without those protections it is a free-for-all. Total anarchy.

No one, including yourself has come up with a better plan thus far.
 

You may be correct that once information gets out its free.

That does not mean that universities are not selling information. It only means that people are willing to pay to get access to the best, latest, cutting edge information and have someone that understands it intimately, explain it to them.

What about drug companies?
They get to have patents on their products. That is IP protection.
Without that, there would be no incentive to spend millions of dollars on research plus going through the burdensome process of getting FDA approval.

"Anyone can figure it out on their own."

Um, really? Try amassing the knowledge needed to become a medical professional on your own & for free.
Most medical articles on the web require that you pay to get access to them.

@Cardmaverick is it blatantly obvious that you don't like the current IP laws.
What would you replace them with?
If your answer is no protection at all, then we will have to agree to disagree because no amount of posting to the contrary will change my mind.

In my life I have been a musician, a jewelry industry professional and a photographer.
Every single one of the above has had IP protection.

Quote from: Graffoto on November 29, 2011, 16:26

This whole premise is idiotic. Information WANTS to be free? No PEOPLE want everything for free.

What does a university like Yale or Harvard sell? Its information!!!
OK, they call it an education but an education is just information presented in a formal manner.

Taken to its logical conclusion university should be free.
Oh and all those folks that sell how to books? Those should be free right?
Oh and lets post detailed information on how to source, assemble and detonate a nuclear device for free as well...after all information WANTS to be free!

Balderdash!

Schools don't sell information - last time I checked, what they sell are things others discovered on their own or in groups of people.

What schools do sell:

The help of seasoned professors

A degree that certifies subject competence

That's basically it.

"Things others have discovered" = Information! Intellectual Property.

I'm really tired of not knowing what is selling. Not that all that much is selling 

@ Noam, it is surreal and almost otherworldly. Love it.
KOL HA KAVOD!

"That's the very thing that the industry needs to address.  As you say, the demand is huge.  Imagine the massive sales increases we'd all experience if the agencies ran huge campaigns to educate the public on copyright theft and proper licensing.  More effort in that area would surely secure the microstock industry's future.  I'm sure many people would purchase if they knew how cheaply the could do so."



This make a lot of sense. The majority of people that I have spoken to, don't even know what stock images are, much less that there is such a thing as microstock.
And of course there is the prevailing thought process that says "if it is on the internet, it must be free".

Here is what I see happening with the iStock best match.  Over the past days they are using it to churn the whole image collection.  The bad news is my sales are down.  The good news is I am selling images that haven't seen a single sale in years.  Perhaps they still have value but were heretofor buried.  Maybe some of my images that were lost on the bottom of the pile will get another chance at life. I can only hope this results in more sales later.

I'm seeing the same thing. But those old files that were buried... well, in may case they are really not my best work. Back when I first started uploading, I was doing things on the cheap. I was using unpaid models (ie no experience), kept my post work minimal and just threw stuff up to see if it would stick.
I don't have much hope that churning the best match will bring a whole new life to these files. They never had that much much life in them to begin with!

Bean counters almost destroyed the American auto industry; forcing it to source cheaper and cheaper parts until the cars all but fell apart an hour after leaving the showroom. It took decades to claw back and its still not where it should be.

One would think that the lesson had been learned, but no.
History repeats itself over and over.

Shakespeare said "The First Thing We Do, Let's Kill All the Lawyers"
I would amend that to Kill All the Bean Counters.

Value is whatever the market will bear.
Which is of course why we get peanuts for most images.


Free is BS. Communism is based on a work for free basis.
Everyone gets the same stuff, regardless of what job they do. That pretty much is the same as working for free.
We saw how that works in real life. No incentive to do better = crappy products, lethargic workers and despondent people.

It is an unsustainable (there is that word again) system.

Yes, Inmotion it is.
Leaf, I did see the thread, but I just skimmed it.
Must have missed where you posted who your host is.