MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock removed my name and continues to sell my video  (Read 7629 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 07, 2020, 18:32 »
+7
I was alerted by another agency this week with which I'm exclusive, that one of my videos is still for sale on Shutterstock. See https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1008267766-aerial-flyover-small-town-beaufort-south-carolina
I shut down my shutterstock account months ago. They removed my name from the video and kept it up for sale. Anyone else having this issue. If they don't do anything about it I'll be taking legal action.


« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2020, 20:09 »
+1
The T&Cs allow for retention up to 2 months before an item is removed.

But also, if the name has gone, its possible the thing cant actually be bought if someone tries to go through with it. 

Quote
b. Shutterstock shall use reasonable efforts to cause Content removed from Shutterstock Websites to be removed from the websites of any Shutterstock affiliates (including co-branded websites)
« Last Edit: December 07, 2020, 20:12 by gnirtS »

« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2020, 20:45 »
+3
The T&Cs allow for retention up to 2 months before an item is removed.

But also, if the name has gone, its possible the thing cant actually be bought if someone tries to go through with it. 

Quote
b. Shutterstock shall use reasonable efforts to cause Content removed from Shutterstock Websites to be removed from the websites of any Shutterstock affiliates (including co-branded websites)
Its been almost 6 months since I disabled my portfolio, and two since I completely closed my account.

« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2020, 21:29 »
0
The T&Cs allow for retention up to 2 months before an item is removed.

But also, if the name has gone, its possible the thing cant actually be bought if someone tries to go through with it. 

Quote
b. Shutterstock shall use reasonable efforts to cause Content removed from Shutterstock Websites to be removed from the websites of any Shutterstock affiliates (including co-branded websites)

The video given in the link can be bought, look.

« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2020, 02:30 »
+9
omg they appropriated your video.

never. upload. shutterstock. never.

« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2020, 04:36 »
+4
I'm so glad I stopped uploading before their new plan. Mainly because of stupid rejections.

« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2020, 08:15 »
+3
You stopped uploading, but you are ok still doing business with a company that appropriates assets, after accounts are closed? I dont get it.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2020, 08:19 by cathyslife »

« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2020, 08:49 »
+4
If you only claim here SS will continue do it. They will claim some tech glitch "bla bla bla" again and still having sales with 100% profit.  I think you should go for legal actions.  BR

« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2020, 09:19 »
+6
Sue them.  Be sure to add to the total for the anxiety this is causing you, and the erosion of your professional image.


« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2020, 11:04 »
+1
If you only claim here SS will continue do it. They will claim some tech glitch "bla bla bla" again and still having sales with 100% profit.  I think you should go for legal actions.  BR

Legal and they're very upset about bad comments on Twitter and Facebook (public, customer facing side).
Might want to consider TrustPilot too.


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2020, 13:16 »
0
I was alerted by another agency this week with which I'm exclusive, that one of my videos is still for sale on Shutterstock. See https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1008267766-aerial-flyover-small-town-beaufort-south-carolina
I shut down my shutterstock account months ago. They removed my name from the video and kept it up for sale. Anyone else having this issue. If they don't do anything about it I'll be taking legal action.

That's not nice. Something sure is wrong with that.



What's odd is, if I search for Beaufort South Carolina at Night, only one image comes up, and that's not it. Odd that the image is still there, not in the search and your name isn't on it. Very strange.  https://www.shutterstock.com/video/search/Beaufort%20South%20Carolina%20at%20Night

And this:  "Sorry, we couldn't find any results for aerial flyover small town beaufort"

How did that other agency find it? And I know, your link does work, I can see the image.  :o

« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2020, 14:05 »
+6
If you do a search with Google and "aerial flyover small town beaufort", the first result is on Shutterstock. This is how Pond5 found it.

It look like SS keep the footage available from Google search but not from it own search engine. Clever way to say it is not their fault.

« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2020, 20:52 »
+8
Ive been going back and forth with their support from someone overseas with no real power to et anything done. Getting the usual BS. This time I responded back with their infringement department ccd, saying that theyve essentially admitted that theyve broken the terms of service by still having it for sale. They can either take it down or the next correspondence will be from my lawyer. I think Ive got a case. The only question is whether its worth going through with a lawsuit.

« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2020, 08:34 »
0
Ive been going back and forth with their support from someone overseas with no real power to et anything done. Getting the usual BS. This time I responded back with their infringement department ccd, saying that theyve essentially admitted that theyve broken the terms of service by still having it for sale. They can either take it down or the next correspondence will be from my lawyer. I think Ive got a case. The only question is whether its worth going through with a lawsuit.

Look

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2020, 09:21 »
+1
Ive been going back and forth with their support from someone overseas with no real power to et anything done. Getting the usual BS. This time I responded back with their infringement department ccd, saying that theyve essentially admitted that theyve broken the terms of service by still having it for sale. They can either take it down or the next correspondence will be from my lawyer. I think Ive got a case. The only question is whether its worth going through with a lawsuit.

I hope you get a settlement, this stinks. Get a lawyer who specializes in this kind of thing, wasn't there one for artists. Usually first consultation is free, which means, they get the details and decide if they want to handle the case or if there's a good chance of winning.

If you do a search with Google and "aerial flyover small town beaufort", the first result is on Shutterstock. This is how Pond5 found it.

It look like SS keep the footage available from Google search but not from it own search engine. Clever way to say it is not their fault.

No excuse for them to let this happen.

« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2020, 16:59 »
0
Ive been going back and forth with their support from someone overseas with no real power to et anything done. Getting the usual BS. This time I responded back with their infringement department ccd, saying that theyve essentially admitted that theyve broken the terms of service by still having it for sale. They can either take it down or the next correspondence will be from my lawyer. I think Ive got a case. The only question is whether its worth going through with a lawsuit.

I hope you get a settlement, this stinks. Get a lawyer who specializes in this kind of thing, wasn't there one for artists. Usually first consultation is free, which means, they get the details and decide if they want to handle the case or if there's a good chance of winning.

If you do a search with Google and "aerial flyover small town beaufort", the first result is on Shutterstock. This is how Pond5 found it.

It look like SS keep the footage available from Google search but not from it own search engine. Clever way to say it is not their fault.

No excuse for them to let this happen.
I have read that Shutterstock is used to selling the contents of the accounts that they close. Remember?

« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2020, 03:10 »
+4
You stopped uploading, but you are ok still doing business with a company that appropriates assets, after accounts are closed? I dont get it.

No, I'm not ok with that. I said I stopped uploading way before June 2020. After that all my videos were deleted.


« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2020, 06:51 »
0
You stopped uploading, but you are ok still doing business with a company that appropriates assets, after accounts are closed? I dont get it.

No, I'm not ok with that. I said I stopped uploading way before June 2020. After that all my videos were deleted.


Heres what you said that I replied to: I'm so glad I stopped uploading before their new plan. Mainly because of stupid rejections. Where does it say you deleted your videos?

« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2020, 04:07 »
+4
Heres what you said that I replied to: I'm so glad I stopped uploading before their new plan. Mainly because of stupid rejections. Where does it say you deleted your videos?

And where does it say I didn't deleted my videos? I just said I was out of SS way before their new plan, mainly because of stupid rejections.

You stopped uploading, but you are ok still doing business with a company that appropriates assets, after accounts are closed? I dont get it.

On the other hand, you said I still doing business with SS even though you didn't know that. Well I'm obviously not. And I would never ever give my work, especially clips made with expensive drone for dollar or so. Also we wrote an article about that topic:

https://www.spartaq.com/en/shutterstock-rise-and-tragic-fall-of-microstock/

« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2020, 08:13 »
0
Heres what you said that I replied to: I'm so glad I stopped uploading before their new plan. Mainly because of stupid rejections. Where does it say you deleted your videos?

And where does it say I didn't deleted my videos? I just said I was out of SS way before their new plan, mainly because of stupid rejections.

You stopped uploading, but you are ok still doing business with a company that appropriates assets, after accounts are closed? I dont get it.

On the other hand, you said I still doing business with SS even though you didn't know that. Well I'm obviously not. And I would never ever give my work, especially clips made with expensive drone for dollar or so. Also we wrote an article about that topic:

https://www.spartaq.com/en/shutterstock-rise-and-tragic-fall-of-microstock/

😂

« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2020, 11:09 »
0
I was alerted by another agency this week with which I'm exclusive, that one of my videos is still for sale on Shutterstock. See https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1008267766-aerial-flyover-small-town-beaufort-south-carolina
I shut down my shutterstock account months ago. They removed my name from the video and kept it up for sale. Anyone else having this issue. If they don't do anything about it I'll be taking legal action.
What did Shutterstock tell you about it?

« Reply #21 on: December 15, 2020, 10:09 »
+2
We wouldn't still be having this conversation if everyone had boycotted shuttercocks ...

« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2020, 14:52 »
+1
We wouldn't still be having this conversation if everyone had boycotted shuttercocks ...
But it's important to know what happened if he sues Shutterstock for selling his videos without his consent.

« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2020, 13:04 »
+2
You have a case no doubt. This happened to me in the past with a few top red flames bestseller images uploaded by some pirate to them. I made them aware of that I also contacted the legal department at Istock/Getty and the images were gone in 10 days after many mails by me to them. Nowadays I would not go this route. I would send only 1 mail and maybe a registered fax and afterwards sue seeking damages. It is their responsibility the content they sell on their site. Does not matter what's in their TOS. A Judge will see what kind of responsibility they carry whatever they say.

If you are not in the US go to court in your country. If they violate intellectual property their site might be banned access in your country. And if this happen I am sure they will contact you quickly and negotiate a settlement before court. Don't be afraid if they are big. If you are telling the truth they stole your content and are selling it. No way they are going to win such a case.

Before you initiate judicial actions go to a public notary so he can certify that they are still selling the content on their web. After that for everyday it was online you ask for damages and to be taken down obviously.



Ive been going back and forth with their support from someone overseas with no real power to et anything done. Getting the usual BS. This time I responded back with their infringement department ccd, saying that theyve essentially admitted that theyve broken the terms of service by still having it for sale. They can either take it down or the next correspondence will be from my lawyer. I think Ive got a case. The only question is whether its worth going through with a lawsuit.

« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2020, 18:29 »
0
You have a case no doubt. This happened to me in the past with a few top red flames bestseller images uploaded by some pirate to them. I made them aware of that I also contacted the legal department at Istock/Getty and the images were gone in 10 days after many mails by me to them. Nowadays I would not go this route. I would send only 1 mail and maybe a registered fax and afterwards sue seeking damages. It is their responsibility the content they sell on their site. Does not matter what's in their TOS. A Judge will see what kind of responsibility they carry whatever they say.

If you are not in the US go to court in your country. If they violate intellectual property their site might be banned access in your country. And if this happen I am sure they will contact you quickly and negotiate a settlement before court. Don't be afraid if they are big. If you are telling the truth they stole your content and are selling it. No way they are going to win such a case.

Before you initiate judicial actions go to a public notary so he can certify that they are still selling the content on their web. After that for everyday it was online you ask for damages and to be taken down obviously.



Ive been going back and forth with their support from someone overseas with no real power to et anything done. Getting the usual BS. This time I responded back with their infringement department ccd, saying that theyve essentially admitted that theyve broken the terms of service by still having it for sale. They can either take it down or the next correspondence will be from my lawyer. I think Ive got a case. The only question is whether its worth going through with a lawsuit.

It would be interesting if he can gain that case and get some $ millions, but i think Shutterstock will use all its power and influence! Maybe that possible if the guy live in the USA. But, i don't know much about the USA laws, maybe i'm dreaming! :)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
3698 Views
Last post January 30, 2015, 13:11
by BaldricksTrousers
2 Replies
2328 Views
Last post November 10, 2016, 11:07
by Wrighty
21 Replies
7525 Views
Last post August 11, 2017, 06:56
by increasingdifficulty
26 Replies
6573 Views
Last post August 11, 2020, 14:15
by m
1 Replies
2076 Views
Last post September 08, 2020, 16:14
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle