It is a licence that allows for sensitive use and the sale is called SOD, they can go at 120 dollar





 

That's great!  I hope that the Shutterstock will acquire all the former Getty/iStock clients!

Hello,

These higher royalty sales are the result of enterprise agreements with large companies and advertising agencies.  Typically, they work with Shutterstock through negotiated agreements, which can include things like the option for sensitive use (although very few uses would be a sensitive one), additional legal indemnification, extra workflow features, etc., to meet the exact needs of their business.   As a result, they're paying higher fees and contributors receive higher royalties. 

We have an increasing number of relationships that come to us through such custom agreements, which result in higher royalties paid out to contributors.   Those customers are typically major publishing houses, major advertising agencies, and Fortune 500 companies around the world (among others).

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock

I had a couple of big SODs this month, without them it would have been abysmal. It shouldn't be that way. The SODs compensate for the drop in earnings. They should be the gravy, the cherry, the cream, etc. I appreciate the high SODs, but developments at Shutterstock are still worrisome. The fact they refuse a raise whilst reporting record sales is sad.

Quote from: Valo on August 31, 2014, 08:50

I had a couple of big SODs this month, without them it would have been abysmal. It shouldn't be that way. The SODs compensate for the drop in earnings. They should be the gravy, the cherry, the cream, etc. I appreciate the high SODs, but developments at Shutterstock are still worrisome. The fact they refuse a raise whilst reporting record sales is sad.

+1  . got 2 agree. SOD should not be the saving grace of a poor (quote: abysmal) summer stats.
it does not erase the fact that SS earnings are falling off a cliff...
no doubt with all their "experiments" to  screw-up placement for many contributors with
consistently historical selling images.

if machine is not broken, what try to fix it all the time???

Quote from: topol on August 31, 2014, 02:18

Can you show us an expample for sensitive use? Kind of a broad term, I would be interested in what it means in the real world, a real example of course.

I don't have one handy, but there are lots of theoretical examples: one example could be an image of a senior citizen used for a pharmaceutical ad about Alzheimer's medication.

A sensitive use might cause a reasonable person to believe that the subject of the image suffers from a physical or mental health condition; endorses, advocates, or believes in a particular product, service, cause or opinion; or is otherwise associated with an issue that some might consider controversial or unflattering.

So, for example, a major consumer retailer, pharma company or advertising agency that sometimes creates material related to prescription drugs, physical or mental ailments, etc., might want to have a set of licenses that allow them the flexibility to use images of people in a sensitive way - but not every use that they have would be a sensitive one (very few might fall under that category). 

The important thing is that by being opted into sensitive use, you're opted into all enterprise licenses of the type that pay $75, $120 or more, even if very few would result in an actual sensitive use.

Best,

Scott