me in.

48 + 18 pending

People are talking about stopping uploading as way of punishing Istock but what would be far more effective would if everyone used their full upload allocation to submit images that would get rejected (for one flaw or another). Istock would still have to pay their inspectors for the work but would gain no benefit whatsoever. In fact it would cost them quite a bit if it was done on a large enough scale.

This would work brilliantly if we all uploaded the same image, over and over again - one that depicts how we feel, any photoshoppers out there?

First step after attempting to contact the site's owners would be to issue their web hosting provider (you can get this from the whois records) with DMCA takedown notice, most hosting companies will comply if it's a legitimate copyright infringement and take the site offline. If the site is hosted by a reseller you then have to search their whois records and find out who hosts them and do the same.

Also if they have google adsense ads on the site you can issue google with a DMCA, google will usually block their ads loosing them revenue.

I know this is mostly about the google 'deal' but this is equally damming and giving away stock images to people that would otherwise buy them:  http://blog.getresponse.com/1000-free-istock-images-in-getresponse.html

It's also probably the tip of an even bigger iceberg of free give aways by istock.

I thought as much, what's your average royalty for a full sized download?

I signed up with them a few weeks ago and got accepted but since then I've read lots of bad things about DepositPhotos which has put me off uploading anything, has anyone got anything good to say about them or should I avoid them with a barge pole?

Is there any point for the copyright holder to contact google directly and ask them to remove the images? I am thinking they will not do it, but if not copyright holders does contact them, they might be a little less eager to push more projects like that in the future.

If you issue them a DMCA notice they have to act on it: http://www.google.co.uk/dmca.html but whether or not you'd get anywhere in the long term is another matter, though it would be very bad publicity it were to appear in the press that they are using images without the knowledge or knowing consent of 1000's of artists

Hi,
On sites that pay less commission do you still upload at full resolution or do you downsize? If you downsize what resolution do you resize to?

I spent some time looking over the FAA site and reading this thread because I have some photos that might sell very well as fine art. But I had one question I can't seem to find a direct answer for. If you upload a picture, you set the price at the same time. What happens if you decide later you want to change the price, either higher or lower? Can you change prices later? How?

The answer will probably be obvious if I join and upload an image but I haven't done that yet.

You can change the prices at any time by editing the picture.

I think it's a bad translation and is probably asking if you're a business or an individual for tax purposes.

Glad it's not just me then, very depressing though - if only we could set a minimum.

I had one rejected for just about every reason possible, it was an object isolated on white. Accepted in the same batch was the exact same photo that I'd flipped into portrait orientation