Am I missing something or have you still not answered the 'have they signed a model release form' question? Your last post said that you 'showed them a contract' which is slightly different than them actually signing it. I have no reason to believe you don't have a signed model release, but your repeated avoidance of the question does make me think.

If you will read attentively you will see that i mentioned about 5-10 times that YES WE SIGNED ALL MODEL RELEASES

Now can you see?

Reply #34 above says he had a signed release.

One issue might be that models from developing countries may have no real idea of how images might be used, and in particular how they might be manipulated - they may have no or limited exposure to computers in general or to what's possible with Photoshop. So they might be able to claim they were not "fully informed" about the implications of the contract. Not saying this applies to this particular model, and the legal notion of "fully informed consent" to a contract, so fundamental here, might not apply in other legislations.

Some mention above has been made of witness signatures: this could fall down if the witness were a friend of the model, in which case they might be persuaded to side with the model, or if the witness were a friend of the photographer, in which case the model might claim it was all a set-up on the tog's side.
In any case, SS's MR, and some others don't require any contact details for a witness. And people move around, change phone numbers, email addys etc Again, not saying this is the case here - though circus members are probably more mobile than most -  just mentioning hypotheticals.

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on April 20, 2017, 12:55

Am I missing something or have you still not answered the 'have they signed a model release form' question? Your last post said that you 'showed them a contract' which is slightly different than them actually signing it. I have no reason to believe you don't have a signed model release, but your repeated avoidance of the question does make me think.

If you will read attentively you will see that i mentioned about 5-10 times that YES WE SIGNED ALL MODEL RELEASES

Now can you see?

That's why I opened with "Am I missing something or...." and if you would like to read carefully as well, you'll note that I didn't accuse you of anything.

Quote from: jonbull on April 20, 2017, 06:38

Quote from: MillesTeam on April 20, 2017, 05:31

I'm sorry that i didn't answered fast. Because i'm not used to forums. And i have very little of time because we just came back from Spain with plenty of new shootings and i have to select and forward them to retouch and maintain many things in team. So i will be reading and answering time after time.

Thank you all for support. I really wish to everyone to avoid such crap from the bottom of my heart. But i also suggest that all of you should find more safe way to run this business. Today the roulette hits me but tomorrow it could be anyone else. Someone will write that you stolen the idea, another one will say he/she did not signed release... Everything is possible.

And i wish you will be able to find a safer place to work. Because Shutterstock doesn't seem to care about us. They care about money only. Moeny they earn selling OUR images.

with all respect what happen the beahvious of ss is completely obscure..
nobody i think understood.

are you banned?
they banned you?
you were forced to delete images?

it seems you have something personally more than business oriented.

They say they will ban me if i will not delete, so i think yes they are forcing me to delete these images. I moved to Stocksy what means that i upload there actively and regularly. I still have active SS portfolio until they will ban me but i stopped submitting maybe 2 years ago or around that. So i care because of this fact.

I don't like the fact that if you working well somebody anyway will be able to kick your ass. They now earn to us around 5x less than Stocksy so it will be a loss but not a huge one.

But anyway.. why should i lose even this amount of cash if i did everything well? Should i just let it go in your opinion? Of course i will not put many efforts to this problem. If they will ban me at the end okay.

But at least many other people will know about this and will keep it in mind. And maybe it will help.

Starting this thread i'm not looking for any help or whatever. Maybe a little moral support and spreading info to others. Maybe to newbies who think that Shutterstock is an angel and a really good place.

That was the actual answer from them:

Dear Kirill,

Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, due to further complaints we have received from the models, we need to remove the images from licensing. We request that you remove all images from your portfolio featuring the models to avoid any further issues. Please respond directly to this email to confirm the images have been removed.

Regards,
Lauren

I answered that i will not spend my time on this and that they could remove by themselves or close an account. Because why should i spend more time to SS if they are that pieces of crap? What if after this story all models will start complaining? They will delete all the images?

Good luck to them, i don't care))

stocksy is so good then? never thought.
i like the agency more than micro, hope they open again.

Quote from: jonbull on April 21, 2017, 06:36

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on April 20, 2017, 12:55

Am I missing something or have you still not answered the 'have they signed a model release form' question? Your last post said that you 'showed them a contract' which is slightly different than them actually signing it. I have no reason to believe you don't have a signed model release, but your repeated avoidance of the question does make me think.

i think is implicit cause shutter stock wouldn't have accepted without release.

Somebody mentioned earlier whether the circus dude might have given permission for them to be shot, rather than the actual performers themselves. So it's possible (although unlikely) that the ring master may have signed the model release on their behalf. I mean, do the agencies check that the name and signature on the model release is the name and signature of the person in the photo? How would they even do that?

ok. it seems strange to me that an agency like ss could be scared by somebody in russi, i mean if the girl want do lawsuit against ss how she can do ?, who write an email to complain about appearing in a photo with apparently has a model release signed.

i speculate
1 circus owners got all money or most of them
2 the girl realized she was used with low money and complaint.
3 circus owner signed the release?

if ss was scared by an email complaint all the releases could be potentially fake and every model could ask the photo to be deleted.

Quote from: jonbull on April 21, 2017, 06:36

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on April 20, 2017, 12:55

Am I missing something or have you still not answered the 'have they signed a model release form' question? Your last post said that you 'showed them a contract' which is slightly different than them actually signing it. I have no reason to believe you don't have a signed model release, but your repeated avoidance of the question does make me think.

i think is implicit cause shutter stock wouldn't have accepted without release.

Somebody mentioned earlier whether the circus dude might have given permission for them to be shot, rather than the actual performers themselves. So it's possible (although unlikely) that the ring master may have signed the model release on their behalf. I mean, do the agencies check that the name and signature on the model release is the name and signature of the person in the photo? How would they even do that?

Years ago a former regular on here (now banned) was asked on the iS forum how he got releases from all of a group of actual workers (not models) in particular series of photos. He said their boss signed them. These had got through at iS, but after posting that he was told (in the forum) that that wasn't acceptable.
I can see that there could be circumstances in which a boss might co-erce employess to sign releases, especially if they were getting some good deal from the photographer.
(Again, not saying that this is what happened in the OP's circumstance).

I don't have one single video clip or photo in my portfolio with people, not even myself.
I am glad I don't

what is the problem to delete these images? are the 38 cent per sale worth the anger?

Lost production cost is unfortunate but if I had disgruntled models in my portfolio I would eagerly remove them. 

what i dont understand is that shutterstock allegedly has valid model releases, so why would they side with the model? if thats the case and they force the photographer to remove the images or else, we might as well just do away with the model release all together.

ss should tell the model to sort it out with the photographer and thats the end of it

It sounds like that's pretty much what they did. They haven't insisted he remove the images. The worst thing they did was word their initial message in a needlessly aggressive confrontational tone with the "reply in three days or else" threat. Really out of order. They should spend some money on contributor relations staff rather than renting half the empire state building for a company doing most of its work on the Internet.

For people who missed information:

All models were informed very well:

- They saw major agencies sites
- They have read a Model Release ( we use the one based on iStock )
- I explained very well what will happen to images

They got money from me to their hands directly and their boss did not get anything from them.

Theu signed releases by themselves.

Their boss just gave them some additional money. That was what they told me and i do not know why he did it. Maybe he was in a good mood or who knows.

In my stock career i was working with 500-700 models. And it is the only case.

You must know that very often circus these circus workers are sleeping for money with their bosses or rich people. Boys and girls.. Same. They are coming to Russia to earn money and build a house in their african countries.

So.. based on behavior of this exact model it is clear that she just want money and nothing else. Because she said to me that if i pay she will stop. But if i do this it will repeat in few months again. and than again. You should never let such people get what they ask.

What about Shutterstock.. It is bad that authors feel unsafe. Because you can invest and then you will be punished for nothing. Because they don't care and spend no time to solve the problem.

Also they ask me to delete few hundreds of images. Okay.. But who will give me back money i spent on props, models, studio, retouching, keywording, uploading? Who will give me money for my time and work as photographer? Who will give me money for deleting?

Did you see their interface? Okay if i can delete just using content manager and just place it in one set and delete.. But i should delete one by one from page to page and it will take 1-2-3 days! Who will pay me for this?

Also what about images with group of people involving this crappy model? Why should i delete images with other people? And what if they like to be models? What if they send me images of them from Kenya and they are happy to be printed somewhere in Nairobi?

Why it must affect so many people if only one person decided to change her mind? She signed? yes.. She worked? yes. She got the money? yes. So why?

I think that you should decide before other people worked. But after decision you must be responsive and do not affect badly on other people.