Jump to content

Natwood

Members
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Natwood

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

613 profile views
  1. Thank you, it's good to know. I'll see, I hope it won't be necessary.
  2. Right, work is something that is created and not stolen from other people and added to sets.
  3. Looks like thieves allowed to do everything as long as it brings money to SS unless the author will demand to remove stolen images. Then they'll remove it (not straight away, of course, they never in hurry with those issues). Software which detects similar images is not a fantastic thing, no doubt SS has it and can easily detect whether a submission is original or stolen. The only reason they don't do that is that they are not interested. They get most of the payment for every download of every image - be it a stolen one or original and they don't care about artists' rights.
  4. Illustrators, check this set. I found my illustration in it, you might find yours too. https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/cupid-icon-set-love-valentines-day-1755009611
  5. I think SS were not sure whether earnings reduction for contributors would go smooth. They needed to check it out before lowering their prices for the customers. Now, when they've seen that everything went cool – the contributors keep selling their images on SS and the microstock keeps growing – they know that they have enough room for dropping prices. And they will do it, just wait and see. And when they do it, other microstocks will have no choice but to cut prices too and, of course, the contributors' earnings as well.
  6. "as everyone is putting" Wow. Do you mean people lie about their statistics?
  7. Haha cool. But don't worry, you'll find many survivors on Pond5, AS, DT, Alamy and maybe other decent places.
  8. I wonder if the new contributors are aware of the new SS commissions. They maybe read about SS in some old posts in blogs and join, and SS don't even provide any clear information with actual prices, just misty percents.
  9. I agree that Adobe is a richer company and has a better plan, but if SS starts dropping the prices for images then Adobe Stock, and all other microstocks as well, will be affected a lot. And the contributors will be affected the most.
  10. I don't mean the whole virtual space, I mean their own site, they can definitely check if SS already has same image before approving it. And, yes, I agree with you in what you said about SS priorities. When I said "I don't understand why it happens" I was being sarcastic, I do understand why it happens
  11. When I had same problem it took time to remove the images which were stolen from me. But it also took me some time to get the instructions for submitting complaint correctly. I would like to save your time a little, so here is the instructions I've received then. "Thank you for contacting Shutterstock. If you believe that your copyright has been infringed, we ask you to submit a DMCA Copyright Infringement Notice. Please follow the instructions on this page to submit all the required information so we may investigate and take action as quickly as possible. Please keep in mind the following requirements: You must be the copyright holder in order to submit a DMCA, or be the legal representative of the person being infringed You must identify the work being infringed (links, image IDs) Provide links to the infringing work (links, image IDs) Provide contact information for yourself Please send your DMCA notice directly to our Legal department at infringementclaims@shutterstock.com. If this notice is not sent directly to infringementclaims@shutterstock.com we cannot guarantee that it will be handled appropriately or in a timely manner." I hope it'll help.
  12. I don't understand why it happens. Shutterstock has algorithms for finding similar images and they can easily find out if a new image was stolen from another Shutterstock portfolio. Then why do they approve stolen images?
  13. This contributor has other stolen photos and illustrations in his portfolio. I wonder, how many of the images in his portfolio are his. https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/pet-animal-sleeping-on-sofa-1759865114 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/cute-pet-dog-on-floor-1759922246 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/human-face-alarm-clock-image-1759580480 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/all-dry-fruits-on-table-1758229544 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/lonely-wooden-path-on-water-cloudy-1759479479 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/three-puppies-playing-ground-1761158591 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/three-horses-green-nature-background-1761232112 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/orange-slices-empty-space-1759453085 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/sofran-colourful-leaves-on-wooden-space-1759470122
  14. Right, and now it's up to contributors whether to help Shutterstock to destroy other agencies or not.
  15. What's really ridiculous is that Oringer "forgot" that there are other microstocks and no need to sell content "on your own".
×
×
  • Create New...