Quote from: zsooofija on July 17, 2020, 05:07

Quote from: Uncle Pete on July 16, 2020, 08:37

Minimum is 10 cents, which means if some big buyer has a deal and pays, 25c an image, instead of us getting .075 we get 10c. No that's not anything to cheer about, but that also means SS is paying us more than our true commission when a buyer gets a extremely low price for images.

In most cases this is not true. Don't forget that most clients do not download all images in their subs-plan, but SS pays us % only of the downloaded images. They keep 100% for the ones the buyer did not download.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on July 16, 2020, 08:37

It's difficult for me to understand how some buyer would pay less than 25c a download or use, so that people on level 6 are still getting only 10c commission. But that's what the numbers say? I think there's some Facebook deal where they use images for advertising and pay on a contract,which could be lower than 25� a use, we'll all get 10c a use for those.

Very simple: image pack with 9000 downloads for $1999 (=0.22 per image).

How many buyers use their whole pack and how many don't? .22 per image, 9000 pack, would be losing .24 per image. $2160 lost when the buyer downloads 9000. That doesn't seem very smart. If the buyer uses half their subscription, SS loses $1080 makes $990 for no download, which is a net loss of $90. Who buys a 9000 subscription and only downloads half?

Shutterstock is not an artists charity.

My account is closed, my images are not on yayimages anymore, and they promised to remove it from partner sites within a few days.
To be honest, this was one of the fastest response / action I ever got from a website, so I don't know how they don't respond to your request..

Quote from: zsooofija on December 30, 2020, 07:09

Quote from: Free_Soul on December 30, 2020, 00:57

Amazon is complete fraud  they check nothing about sellers before putting up their products in their sites 😂😂

That is true, but who checks sellers these days? Do you know any PoD or microstock site that do check the products/content? I don't.

Mostly I agree, the PODs do not check and most that I've seen, hide behind DMCA and do nothing. You have to file the claim. I haven't had the problem but some others here have reported sellers can file a counter claim and block us from our claims. Frustrating.

True most agencies don't seem to check in advance. How would you expect them to check the entire WWW for similar images? Agencies on their own have hundreds of millions of individual still images. I'll admit that some of those millions are the same images, but considering every upload and 150,000 new a day, for example, how do they check, every image? How would you do that if you were an agency?

Last, believe it or not, some agencies actually do check.  Here's a rejection I got recently:

Rejection Reason

    Image found on one or more stock agency sites and may infringe on another person's intellectual property rights.

Meaning they checked for similar and found similar on other agency sites. In fact I checked and found similar, but not the same as mine. I used a newspaper image from around 1872, which is fine and free to use, out of copyright. But because similars were found, using an image search, mine was rejected. Mine was not copied, and of course  mine is much better.

My objection is, that these POD places don't try to protect us, even when we make a claim. The agencies try to block us from contacting their customers, and I can see why, because of false claims and harassment, but then the agencies don't really do anything to help or protect us, much of the time?

Why bother filing or finding misuse if they - PODs and agencies - don't even try to help? Of course we're unhappy. Another part of this is, anything on the web can and might be stolen from us. The only place things are safe is by never trying to sell them. So we are stuck. Either have everything protected at home and never make a sale, or take the risk and put it up on the web for download.

There will be thieves and misuse.

Thanks for your comment zsooofija.  Which agency are you writing about?

Reading what others have written there seems to be different views on whether the POD shop needs to buy ANY kind of license BEFORE they actually sell the POD.  Also these deals seem to differ from agency to agency.

Which agencies require ELs before actually selling PODs? 

It would interesting also to know which agencies require no license of any kind before actually selling PODs?  Or just standard license?

 

OK. Pretty decent sum has turned up for Subs income November.   But not the same as previous months.

So not the 'double earnings' any more or is it just me who has got this reduced amount?

Interesting they seem to be spending more resources making sure people don't publish earnings than they do with stolen portfolios.

�Self-identifying artists from underrepresented communities� are creators who identify as being part of an underrepresented community, such as: Black, Hispanic & Latinx, Asian/Pacific Islander, Indigenous, LGBTQ+, Female, Disability, Age, Veteran, Religion, Body & Skin Type."

seems the only folk left out are self-identifying cis white young atheist males! 

are all religions underrepresented?  what is a self identifying female?

[tongue only slightly in cheek]

Quote from: zsooofija on November 08, 2020, 16:04

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 08, 2020, 11:05

Quote from: zsooofija on November 08, 2020, 05:05

Quote from: Lola Ginabrigeta on October 12, 2020, 11:24

Restrict new users from Ukraine.

According to this logic, ebay or etsy should ban sellers from the USA because only this year I reported about a dozen users from the US selling my work without a proper license.
It should be judged on a case-by-case basis rather than based on the country you are living in. Agencies could do a much better job on checking/reacting, but since they are making money either way they don't care that much.

Just a point, since people are getting all up in arms. She said RESTRICT not ban.

I don't know why anyone here would defend image thieves, whether they are from (country name here) or anywhere else. SS does restrict some new users from some known hotbeds of thieves, fake accounts and where they are known for portfolios of entirely stolen images. Last I saw, it was 90 days before they can collect the first payout.

Someone else has said, agencies should do better ID checks. Funny how many times we've seen people complaining that the agency won't accept their ID or how the people don't want their private information in the hands of the agency. Darned if you do, darned if you don't? 

Account Registration

    You must be 18 years of age to create a Shutterstock account.

    You may not sign up for an account with identification documents belonging to another individual, share an account with another individual, and/or share content with another Shutterstock contributor without prior consent from Shutterstock.

    The �Make payments to� name in your account must be your full legal name as it appears on your identification documents; this is the name to which royalty payments will be made. For business accounts this field will contain the business name.

    In order to make your Shutterstock account a business account, you must provide us with documentation as required by your country or state that indicates you are a principal owner of the business. 

    You may not open a second Shutterstock account without permission from Shutterstock.

    You may not share the same online payment processing service account (like Payoneer, Paypal or Skrill) with another Shutterstock contributor. 

If this is how they handle things, agencies should know precisely who is opening the account and who is responsible for the uploads. But some places, it's much easier to get a fake ID, or possibly some agencies just are trusting, until something goes wrong?

The word for blaming a whole country or population for what a minority of individuals do is stereotyping or a generalization, maybe a negative ethnic bias? Nothing to do with race.

Racism is not just about race, it can be against a ethnic group also. (because scientifically race is not even thing - we all belong to the human race - but that is a whole other discussion).
I still think it should be agencies responsibility instead of these discriminatory practices (call them whatever you want).

LOL as one of the American Race now, I was making it clear that it's not race but the correct word is stereotyping, nothing more or less. And I think you read what I wrote which said: "If this is how they handle things, agencies should know precisely who is opening the account and who is responsible for the uploads." because the agencies have IDs and payment accounts. Nothing about discrimination, which is another good word for restricting whole countries.

So you and Cathy can keep insisting that a country is a race?

racist, rac�ism  (rā′sĭz′əm)
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Restrict new users from Ukraine.