MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 30 day limit on disabling content - more scare tactics?  (Read 3216 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 09, 2020, 09:07 »
+9
So shutterstock just put in a message that once you disable content you can't turn it on for 30 days. And that it'll negatively affect performance

Wow, these people just don't let up on the arm twisting and scare tactics. Since when did having a fair dialog go out of style



Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk



« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2020, 09:11 »
+2
 >:(

Would have been nice to turn ports on and off....
Buyers would put pics in their lightbox and the next day theyre gone......

I would only need 5 more $ to reach payout and then leave forever. But my port is off.

Do you get the same message when turning ports on? 30 days no return to off?

« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2020, 11:04 »
+4
>:(

Would have been nice to turn ports on and off....
Buyers would put pics in their lightbox and the next day theyre gone......

I would only need 5 more $ to reach payout and then leave forever. But my port is off.

Do you get the same message when turning ports on? 30 days no return to off?

Good, thats exactly what we want. Frustrated buyers going elsewhere. 👍

« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2020, 15:22 »
0
Wonder if the search ranking line means that now once deactivated, images lose all ranking points and start from 0 again on re-enabling...

« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2020, 15:35 »
+2
Wonder if the search ranking line means that now once deactivated, images lose all ranking points and start from 0 again on re-enabling...
Doubt it, even SHUTTERSTOCK wants to show its best sellers up front

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2020, 17:22 »
+8
So they saw the angry contributors disabling their ports, got scared and instructed their IT department to put up this banner to demoralize contributors.

In other words, Shutterstock is now employing scare tactics like the evil empire it is, because apparently, what we're doing hurts them.

« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2020, 17:57 »
+2
What i have to say about this moves....Let me see...

 1) In a way it seems a nasty tactic to make us think twice before you push the button disable.
 2) On the other hand it seems a desperate move from them to control us.

If i may,  I am an enthusiast of Foucault's philosophies:  "Power  can  be found everywhere, causing actions that sometimes are in the field of law or in the field of truth. Power must be understood as a floating relationship, not the privilege of one institution or person, while knowledge is found in a relationship of form and content"

So how SS is treating us? bad or good?
They are concerned and want to control us. we got the power of our work, to leave and choose better relationships.
I think for those who can't quit right now they should at least start panning for new relationships.

 
 


« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2020, 17:59 »
+4
When THE MOST RELEVANT search result on '10 cent' on YOUR SITE is not a coin... :)

www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/symbol-do-not-10-cents-on-1752678062 [nofollow]

« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2020, 05:44 »
0
Does it happen to you too?
I changed my link in my SS profile and I discovered that SS is tampering with it, redirecting the URL at a dull website of home improvement.
Have a look at my ss profile https://www.shutterstock.com/g/gameover/about
Maybe it is just me, but... childish, uh?
« Last Edit: July 11, 2020, 06:03 by gameover »

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2020, 05:53 »
+1
Does it happen to you too?
I changed my link in my SS profile and I discovered that SS is tampering with it, redirecting the URL at a dull website of home improvement.
Have a look at my ss profile https://www.shutterstock.com/g/gameover/about
Maybe it is just me, but... childish, uh?

https://twitter.com/acrogame/status/1281899115518078976

The link is missing the ":" after https (the URL shows a ":" but the actual URL in the bottom left corner is without a ":"), thats why the browser thinks it's  "www.https.com" instead, which just happens to be a home improvement website. I don't think there is anything malicious going on here.

Edit: When entering your website URL on your profile page, don't add https as a prefix, because it's already added by SS.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2020, 06:00 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2020, 05:59 »
0
Does it happen to you too?
I changed my link in my SS profile and I discovered that SS is tampering with it, redirecting the URL at a dull website of home improvement.
Have a look at my ss profile https://www.shutterstock.com/g/gameover/about
Maybe it is just me, but... childish, uh?

https://twitter.com/acrogame/status/1281899115518078976


The link is missing the ":" after https (the URL shows a ":" but the actual URL in the bottom left corner is without a ":"), thats why the browser thinks it's  "www.https.com" instead, which just happens to be a home improvement website. I don't think there is anything malicious going on here, must be a coding error?

thank you! I put my complete Url with https:// because they have only http://
Poor SS, I was thinking very badly of them  ;)

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2020, 06:01 »
0
Does it happen to you too?
I changed my link in my SS profile and I discovered that SS is tampering with it, redirecting the URL at a dull website of home improvement.
Have a look at my ss profile https://www.shutterstock.com/g/gameover/about
Maybe it is just me, but... childish, uh?

https://twitter.com/acrogame/status/1281899115518078976


The link is missing the ":" after https (the URL shows a ":" but the actual URL in the bottom left corner is without a ":"), thats why the browser thinks it's  "www.https.com" instead, which just happens to be a home improvement website. I don't think there is anything malicious going on here, must be a coding error?

thank you! I put my complete Url with https:// because they have only http://
Poor SS, I was thinking very badly of them  ;)


No problem. I edited my post before I saw your reply. But you're right, they only have http://

« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2020, 07:17 »
+1
Does it happen to you too?
I changed my link in my SS profile and I discovered that SS is tampering with it, redirecting the URL at a dull website of home improvement.
Have a look at my ss profile https://www.shutterstock.com/g/gameover/about
Maybe it is just me, but... childish, uh?
Shutterstock new policy is humiliating its contributors paying peanuts for their creative work. To find me please follow the link below.

Interesting, since I clicked the first link and lots of what you consider "creative work" consists in selling scans of illustrations from old books, illustrations (even paintings) you did not create of course (childish, uh?). Is "creative" the way you push the button on the scan? And you claim to earn more than pennies from this? By honesty, you simply should NOT. You are not well placed to speak for genuine creative artist investing lots of time and efforts to produce quality and original work. Thes ones have the right to complain.

https://stock.adobe.com/fr/search?creator_id=202231216...
« Last Edit: July 11, 2020, 07:24 by DiscreetDuck »

« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2020, 07:31 »
+3
Quote
Shutterstock new policy is humiliating its contributors paying peanuts for their creative work. To find me please follow the link below.

Interesting, since I clicked the first link and lots of what you consider "creative work" consists in selling scans of illustrations from old books, illustrations (even paintings) you did not create of course (childish, uh?). Is "creative" the way you push the button on the scan? And you claim to earn more than pennies from this? By honesty, you simply should NOT. You are not well placed to speak for genuine creative artist investing lots of time and efforts to produce quality and original work. Thes ones have the right to complain.
I do many things: photos, illustrations, digital art watercolors and paintings, 3D renderings  and I restore and sell antique images from ancient books of my private collection. And yes, I spend creative work in all of them and I earn more then pennies from all of them in the right places.

« Reply #14 on: July 11, 2020, 07:37 »
+4
This is actually a way to keep you from DELETING your images.

While your portfolio is disabled, you can't access your own images to delete them.  They still show up in Shutterstock's database, so Google sees them, and directs searchers to Shutterstock, using your image.  They still count toward Shuttertock's count of images.

So, rather than disable, delete.


« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2020, 07:42 »
+3
Im surprised this is allowed and not copyrighted to scan old paintings and sketches?
Every picture I take with just a small sculpture or grafitti somewhere in the background is rejected for not having a release (even editorial - just had a pic rejected with a wooden sculpture sawn from a dead tree trunk just at the side of a view over a valley and it was rejected three minutes ago as having no release).

And this kind of sketches and paintings needs no relaese??
Im astonished.

« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2020, 07:44 »
+1
This is actually a way to keep you from DELETING your images.

While your portfolio is disabled, you can't access your own images to delete them.  They still show up in Shutterstock's database, so Google sees them, and directs searchers to Shutterstock, using your image.  They still count toward Shuttertock's count of images.

So, rather than disable, delete.

But its good if buyers see those pics but cant actually buy them (because disabled).

I prefer disabled for that reason - pics might count on the total numbers, but it hurts more to see the image you want and not be able to buy it  ;D


« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2020, 07:53 »
+4
This is actually a way to keep you from DELETING your images.

While your portfolio is disabled, you can't access your own images to delete them.  They still show up in Shutterstock's database, so Google sees them, and directs searchers to Shutterstock, using your image.  They still count toward Shuttertock's count of images.

So, rather than disable, delete.
I deleted about 4300 quality images one by one before disabling and leaving only the dullest ones there. I forgot to delete my videoclips (they are not so many). Now I have enabled my account again,   deleted my clips yet (minus 1) and I'm deleting the last 1684 images. I'm not interested of remaining there.

« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2020, 08:52 »
+3
I am getting this message when deleting videos.  Is this another threat? I could not find anything in the terms about never being allowed to upload again.

« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2020, 10:40 »
+4
I am getting this message when deleting videos.  Is this another threat? I could not find anything in the terms about never being allowed to upload again.

I had a quick re-read of the Contributor Terms of Service and the Submitter Guidelines and I don't see anything on that topic either (I did a search for delete and remove as well). If you click on the terms link, which document does it take you to (I can't check as my account is disabled)?

I think they're discouraging deletion of content, but that's a pretty sleazy move if the terms really don't disallow uploading again

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2020, 13:55 »
+2
Im surprised this is allowed and not copyrighted to scan old paintings and sketches?
Every picture I take with just a small sculpture or grafitti somewhere in the background is rejected for not having a release (even editorial - just had a pic rejected with a wooden sculpture sawn from a dead tree trunk just at the side of a view over a valley and it was rejected three minutes ago as having no release).

And this kind of sketches and paintings needs no relaese??
Im astonished.

The rule is : old sketches, paintings and other works become public domain 70 years after the creator's death. So they are no longer copyrighted. Whether it's moral to scan these and earn some money on something that is public domain is a whole different discussion, but it's not illegal or copyright infringement.

« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2020, 15:01 »
+3
The rule is : old sketches, paintings and other works become public domain 70 years after the creator's death.

This rule may be different considering the country of the author and/or the editor.

m

« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2020, 15:04 »
+3
This is actually a way to keep you from DELETING your images.

While your portfolio is disabled, you can't access your own images to delete them.  They still show up in Shutterstock's database, so Google sees them, and directs searchers to Shutterstock, using your image.  They still count toward Shuttertock's count of images.

So, rather than disable, delete.
just tested this with a google search on some of my descriptions. True.
time to start deleting file instead of disabling them. Since ss is doubling down on their positions.

« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2020, 15:08 »
+2
The rule is : old sketches, paintings and other works become public domain 70 years after the creator's death.

This rule may be different considering the country of the author and/or the editor.

In fact the copyrights length can be very different from a country to another
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #24 on: July 13, 2020, 03:56 »
0
The rule is : old sketches, paintings and other works become public domain 70 years after the creator's death.

This rule may be different considering the country of the author and/or the editor.

In fact the copyrights length can be very different from a country to another
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_lengths

Correct, but in most cases it's 50-70 years after the author's death (for anything created after 1978, if I'm not mistaken).


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle