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 - Michael Lancaster

Pages: 1 2 [3]
51
probably they are raising the prices only for the sizes who sells best.

52
General Stock Discussion / Re: New microstock agency.
« on: October 26, 2010, 07:59 »
the guy from the other thread (last year) is from moldavia.
some of the people from the facebook group are also from moldavia.
so the new stock site is clearly from moldavia, second try :).

53
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Agency Collection Now Showing up on IStock
« on: September 17, 2010, 06:56 »
Is Inmagine under Getty?

HultonArchive (exklusive on iStockphoto) is selling the same picture as Inmagine

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-13314651-two-women-gossiping-in-studio-b-w.php
http://es.inmagine.com/rets008/rets008080-photo

HultonArchive has 16123 pictures and the account is only from july 2007. I guess the rules for the others members did not apply for this account as well.

55
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Exclusive Plus $$
« on: June 10, 2010, 01:52 »
What if...
If you put your best seller in Exclusive +, then the customers will buy a non Exclusive + that look similar to yours. Is this true or not?

56
""Products and services other than Internet Broadcast AVC Video," reads MPEG LA's statement to Betanews, "continue to be royalty-bearing, and royalties to apply during the next term will be announced before the end of 2010." Internet Broadcast AVC Video is the name of the patent portfolio to which H.264 belongs, when used in the context of streaming."

"The implied danger here is that a producer of video who did not use a licensed codec (whether or not he owed anything for it) could be exposing the viewer of that video to liability. Or as Mozilla contributor Robert O'Callahan described it in a blog post last Friday, "In other words, if you're an end user in a country where software patents (or method patents) are enforceable, and you're using software that encodes or decodes H.264 and the vendor is not on the list of licensees, the MPEG LA reserves the right to sue you, the end user, as well as the software vendor or distributor.""

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/20100203/h-264-licensing-body-wont-charge-royalties-for-html5-other-web-streams.htm

57
General - Stock Video / Re: H.264
« on: May 07, 2010, 05:57 »
Sigh... People are still bringing this old article up...

The owners of the H.264 patent have already put out a press release after this article came out that they have no intention of going after camera owners for selling their footage.  Canon, Nikon, etc.. have ALREADY PAID the licensing fee for use of the H.264 codec and they are fully aware that if they were to go after individuals, they'd cause the whole industry to switch to a new standard which would cost them millions of dollars.


I'm not sure, did you refer to this communicate?
http://videomaker.com/community/videonews/2010/02/6721-mpeg-la-extends-h-264-codec-royalty-free-licensing/

They are saying in that one:
" MPEG LA announced its AVC Patent Portfolio License, which the H.264 codec belongs to will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as Internet Broadcast AVC Video) during the next License term from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015."
It's sound to me that they are talking about youtube and other sites where it is free of charge for viewing encoded footage.

58
General - Stock Video / H.264
« on: May 05, 2010, 07:53 »
How about selling stock footage that was recorded using the H.264 codec?
There is an intresting article to read about

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20000101-264.html

A lot of the new DSLR cameras has the H.264 codec that required a license for using commercial.

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors