0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Copyright infringment?
perhaps they sent an email without you getting it?Have you tried calling them on the phone?
Does anyone have the same experience? How did you get back online again?
I'm sure that would depend on why you were kicked off. It's hard to say whether someone had the "same experience" when you've given us very little information about what action was taken, other than that your account was disabled.
Perhaps after you speak with SS and they explain why, you can come back and give more details.
It seems strange to me that you have waited since Feb 21 with no understanding of what happened, yet have not attempted to contact them other than through email. I would have been on the phone within 5 minutes of making the discovery, regardless of long distance charges.
If there is a claim of copyright infringement made by another user, even if it's just one image, the SS policy is to immediately suspend your account.
They did the exact same thing to me when they learned I am a moderator on the forum at Fotolia. No warning, no email, no phone call, nothing. It took me about 5 months to get my $12 payment from them. The owner refused to take my calls, would not respond to my emails, nothing. Their response was about worthless. They were nothing if not diligent in their communication when asking me to fax my tax information to them though. Must've received 15 emails, a couple of phone calls, all sorts of communication when they needed something from me. I informed them that their threat to close my account if I didn't hurry and get their paperwork to them was a disincentive for me to hurry it along. I did of course send them their stuff but was very unimpressed with their communication.Mat
I think it is totally reasonable what they did in your case as you were moderating fotolia forum.. That is kind of understandable.. I am not a moderator on any site, yet still banned from fotolia forum for telling my opinion..
Quote from: cidepix on March 05, 2009, 12:09I think it is totally reasonable what they did in your case as you were moderating fotolia forum.. That is kind of understandable.. I am not a moderator on any site, yet still banned from fotolia forum for telling my opinion..I beg to differ. Being banned from a forum is much less serious than a portfolio being banned from sales. A forum is just trivial, since nobody gets paid to post.A site forum is private and it is part of the site's interface to the market. A ranting post can damage the site easily, as it is picked up by Google. In French they say "Dans la maison du pendu on ne parle pas de la corde" (Never mention rope in the house of a man who has been hanged). That's why I never bother to post at site forums. For rants, we have the Microstockgroup.
I am a little angry at what they did but kind of understand. That is not Mat's fault either. It is their policy which is wrong.
Hundred or more years of trade union activism has teached us that an individual robot is powerless against the moguls, and when he sticks his neck out, he gets beheaded.
Great analogy! I'll have to remember that.
Since feb. 21 my account suddenly was disabled. Just like that. No notice. No warnings or anything. My uploading has been disabled. My gallery is empty. Banned from forum. No reaction from helpdesk.I am waiting for three days now for an answer. I searched several sites and forums for information about what I can do. But it seems that photographers have not many rights or voice at Shutterstock.Does anyone have a clue or have the same experience about what's happening at Shutterstock? Please let me know.Thank you! Mark
Now thats really funny to hear Mat talking about 'bad communication'
Dear "Anonymous" (your courage is admirable),While I appreciate the fact you went to the trouble to set up your account yesterday so that you could make your point, I am having a tough time finding the irony you intended. I have been accused of many things, called many names on multiple occasions but for the most part, people don't think I am a bad communicator. I'm pretty much an open book as far as letting you know what's on my mind. If I know something, I'm happy and more-than-willing to share it. The cool thing about it is that I'm also willing to sign my real name to whatever it is I have to say.Have a spectacular day and go shoot some pics would ya?Mat
'The cool thing about it is that I'm also willing to sign my real name to whatever it is I have to say.'; Mat, you are exclusive to Fotolia, and never said a bad thing against them, so it's not so cool to use your real name. I'm afraid I am forced to post as 'anonymous' instead - not a thing I usually do - after reading all that bad stories about accounts being closed, posts being deleted, threads being closed on the official Fotolia forum, and I don't wish to put at risk my hard work there.On most other microstock sites -except perhaps IS- contributors are allowed to speak freely provide they are being polite, while at Fotolia everything which is slightly critical is being censored - by you, by the way I could have chosen a fake username looking real, but I preferred making clear that I am forced to be 'anonymous'.
Quote from: Karimala on March 05, 2009, 13:35Great analogy! I'll have to remember that.It has been around for a while, but I guess that with Obama, you finally discovered socialism in the US.
Not the first time this has happened, and probably not the last. It's difficult for a bystander to know who's at fault for the lockout, but SS' lack of communication in cases like this leaves me speechless every time. It's as if they are unable to understand that people are sometimes not guilty, in spite of what they think they've found. But since they are both police, judge and jury, they have the right to be right, every time, and whatever the truth may be.
Well, I got contact to SS finally. It looks like I missed their e-mail where they ask to respond to a copyright issue. I appologized for not having seen their email and asked them to put me back online again, if necessary without the trouble making photograph. Unfortunately untill now without any positive result. Guess I'll have to wait what Their Highnesses decide for me... to be or not to be online again
So did you find what illustration caused the problem? And why? In my similar case it was "logo" of green punkt (recycle symbol) - i really didn't know, that it is a logo, I thought that it is just a common symbol... And the first email from Shutterstock I didnt get either.
http://www.shutterstock.com/results.mhtml#photo_id=23246977 I'm sorry. Can't show mine... it's offline.
Quote from: orson on March 08, 2009, 15:49So did you find what illustration caused the problem? And why? In my similar case it was "logo" of green punkt (recycle symbol) - i really didn't know, that it is a logo, I thought that it is just a common symbol... And the first email from Shutterstock I didnt get either.Hi Orson. Yes it's about an optical illusion graphic I constructed in Illustrator. It looks like someone claims it to be his/her copyright. But SS won't/can't tell me who or what is the exact claim here. After some searching at SS, I found some more graphics like mine in the SS database that appearently are no problem. Quite strange:http://www.shutterstock.com/results.mhtml#photo_id=23246977 I'm sorry. Can't show mine... it's offline.
I remember seeing something that looks similar to this in a book years ago. Can't remember the exact book but there are a series full of optical illusions. Perhaps they hold the copyright and complained to SS?
Mark, I guess your work was too similar to the illusion of Japanese Professor of Psychology Akiyoshi Kitaoka, who won the Gold prize of the 9th L'ORAL Art and Science of Color Prize, in 2006 in Tokyo with the similar image.http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.htmlPS: Don't miss the warning on that page: This page contains some works of "anomalous motion illusion", which might make sensitive observers dizzy or sick. Should you feel dizzy, you had better leave this page immediately.
'The cool thing about it is that I'm also willing to sign my real name to whatever it is I have to say.'; Mat, you are exclusive to Fotolia, and never said a bad thing against them, so it's not so cool to use your real name. I'm afraid I am forced to post as 'anonymous' instead - not a thing I usually do - after reading all that bad stories about accounts being closed, posts being deleted, threads being closed on the official Fotolia forum, and I don't wish to put at risk my hard work there.
Quote from: an0nym0us on March 08, 2009, 06:37'The cool thing about it is that I'm also willing to sign my real name to whatever it is I have to say.'; Mat, you are exclusive to Fotolia, and never said a bad thing against them, so it's not so cool to use your real name. I'm afraid I am forced to post as 'anonymous' instead - not a thing I usually do - after reading all that bad stories about accounts being closed, posts being deleted, threads being closed on the official Fotolia forum, and I don't wish to put at risk my hard work there.Dan, I just went through the Micropayment group archive and could not find the message you are paraphrasing. Could you provide the exact quote or a link or reference that I could use to read the actual message. Thanks andc h e e r sfredThis is a fair point. Chad Bridwell threatened contributors on the Yahoo Micropayment group last year that anyone critical of Fotolia on a private forum such as MSG and Micropayment could have their accounts deleted without warning. I don't blame anyone for wanting to maintain anonymity so that they can speak freely on sensitive subjects. Sorry Mat, but the company you moderate for has thrown down the gauntlet. "Criticize us, anywhere or anytime, and we will close you down immediately." So now we have an increasing amount of anonymous posters. Doesn't seem fair to blame someone for maintaining anonymity when he/she is just reacting to agency threats.
Did you checked his other works too? This guy is genius! I got too dizzy , but you might find a lot of inspiration there and think out your own original patterns. He has lots of great illusions. And there's a logic in there. No need to copy, but the inspiration is the thing you can definitely find. Good luck!
Fred,From Chad Bridwell on June 13 2008:In concern to the discussions happening in various forums, we believe the majority of these discussions are not constructive and organized by a few to cause riots in the community. We also believe there are those who seek after selfish means of popularity and personal gain. Such discussions are dangerous not only to Fotolia but the entire community because we know that many buyers read and research your words. We believe in free speech but we will not tolerate such discussions from people who benefit from Fotolias success by day and tear us down at night. We will not allow this to continue. If we believe a members actions or comments (on or off Fotolia) are detrimental to the growth of Fotolia we will not hesitate to take action and remove their account regardless of their rank or past success. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/micropayment/message/20539Because of this we have an increase in anonymous posters. And as you can clearly read above, Bridwell and Fotolia do not consider much of what we say to be "constructive." So when Mat Hayward slinks his way on to this message board and complains about someone's anonymity, anyone who has been following this situation for the past year is probably going to rightfully tell Hayward where to stick his opinion.
Why do they then accept this photo:http://www.shutterstock.com/results.mhtml#photo_id=23246977 which in your opinion is also a copy of:http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.html
Started by Graffoto Shutterstock.com
Started by orson « 1 2 3 All » Shutterstock.com
Started by BD iStockPhoto.com
Started by mohamed « 1 2 3 4 All » Shutterstock.com
Started by MilanStojanovic Shutterstock.com