Attention: These forums are no longer active. The iStock Contributor forums have moved to the Contributor Community site.

Google Drive + Update

Displaying 41 to 60 of 657 matches.
OliverChilds
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:15PM
So, as exclusive artists, if we don't want our images to appear in the Google Drive collection for liberation to the world we only have one option which is to remove any content from the partner program and Getty site and keep our fingers crossed that in the time it takes to do that none of them are migrated across. This would of course mean opting out of the Vetta and Agency collections, and trusting in istock to do a good job at protecting them in the future.


 Right now it is difficult , to say the least, to have any faith or trust in Istock who seemingly were just as surprised to learn of this deal as the contributors were, and whose lawyer put forth an official statement just the day before this issue arose regarding the Microsoft "promotion" saying words to the effect that istock would not get involved with a crappy deal like the Microsoft one nowadays. Hardly what you would expect an organisation to say if they were aware that an even crappier deal had recently been struck.


 The Google deal stinks and the Microsoft deal stinks, and the incompetence shown by istock is at a whole new level of jaw dropping.


 

(Edited on 2013-01-11 23:12:35 by OliverChilds)
Maridav
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloads
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:17PM

Since you did not answer many questions in the now closed thread, I guess we need to re-post them here. Here are mine:


I would like an official response explaining all our possibilities of having our pictures removed from "Google stock" immediately.


I would also like to know how iStock would respond to contributors that should decide to issue a DMCA takedown notice to Google?


Is it correctly understood that the images will stay on google drive even after having deleted them on iStock? If yes, then for how long will they be available for free download?
SteveDF
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:20PM
/
/I get the business goal, Getty can sell a lot of images to Google. I get that it would be great to both sell to Google and to have people coming to us from Google. But I have 2 problems:


1) It appears to me that Getty sold the rights to these files too cheaply considering the possible scope of the distribution. I understand the business goal but if I were negotiating this with my images directly I wouldn't accept this small of a payment ($50 or $60 per image if I understand correctly) for how big the user base is. This just makes no sense

2) It appears to me that Google needs to do more to make the user aware of their restrictions. I told my family about this last night at dinner and my 16 year old daughter (who's school uses Google Docs for all there reports) checked it out and her response was that the rules were pretty vague. The only reason she even realized that there were any restrictions is that she has been around a stock photographer for her whole life. I will guarantee you that there are people all over the place using these images for other purposes and they don't even realize they are violating anything. And stripping the metadata ensures that no one can figure it out if they do use something incorrectly. Google states that the user is supposed to verify the licensing is acceptable for their use but how is the user supposed to do that? There is no way the user can possibly do that even if they were willing to take the time and realize that they should. This is the biggest problem.


Google has thrown a few cheap words in an inconspicuous location and washed their hands of the issue. I do not feel that Google has done their part to try to enforce the the license they were granted. I can't find anywhere on the Google docs site says they can only be used for Google Docs. Can HQ point this location out to me?

(Edited on 2013-01-11 18:25:01 by SteveDF)
HeliRy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:21PM

I'm starting to get the feeling that IS/Getty are making an effort to get the highest earning contributors to drop their crowns in frustration. I would bet that the 100 people whose images are used in this Google thing are in the upper echelon of earners here.

Think IS would shed a tear if it's top earners dropped their crowns? Nope, they'd be doing back flips down the hallways.
Somogyvari
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:25PM
Its not that true, because i am not the biggest seller here, but i have 3 Vettas there... so i am in the "LUCKY" 100.
Juanmonino
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:25PM
Their innovations will kill the industry, why don't they fix all multiple technical problems here before they put in scene a "new innovative project", why don't you please fix the broken BM before upsetting even more the people that feed your image banks. Please stop playing corporate america and do something positive for your own business and fix all bugs here and spend some cash in promoting IS among designers.
OliverChilds
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:26PM
Posted By HeliRy:

I'm starting to get the feeling that IS/Getty are making an effort to get the highest earning contributors to drop their crowns in frustration. I would bet that the 100 people whose images are used in this Google thing are in the upper echelon of earners here.

Think IS would shed a tear if it's top earners dropped their crowns? Nope, they'd be doing back flips down the hallways.

Well yes , then all their content would automaticaly be transferred to the PP for culling.
Lobo
This user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.Forum Moderator
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:27PM

Posted By HeliRy:

I'm starting to get the feeling that IS/Getty are making an effort to get the highest earning contributors to drop their crowns in frustration. I would bet that the 100 people whose images are used in this Google thing are in the upper echelon of earners here.

Think IS would shed a tear if it's top earners dropped their crowns? Nope, they'd be doing back flips down the hallways.

I think making assumptions like that in here is problematic. So let's just stay focused on the topic and not deviate to far out of the realm of fact.
flotsom
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:30PM
License information:
Google licensed these images for use by Google users through the Google Drive platform; Users of this platform are granted rights to place this imagery in content created using Google Docs, Google Sites, and Google Presentations, which end uses can be for commercial purposes.
Users are not granted rights to use this imagery outside the context of Google Drive created content.



So in a nutshell millions of people that would otherwise have had to purchase stock imagery can now get it for free, do countless print runs, presentations, adverts, mail outs, display those images on websites and a zillion other uses so long as they created the page, document, whatever, etc, etc using google drive. Meanwhile the artists and providers of said stock imagery get paid peanuts and have the value of their hard work diluted all over the internet.

And the OPT OUT button is where???

(Edited on 2013-01-11 18:32:07 by flotsom)

(Edited on 2013-01-11 18:39:55 by flotsom)
OGphoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:36PM

mr_erin,
Do you in all good conscience sincerely believe that this is a fair deal for contributors?
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:39PM
Just for fun, the Getty Rights Managed calculator:
1. Apps - Corporate or promotional use: Commercial or promotional use within an application. Includes applications that are given away as part of a promotion for other products or services. (Does not include use within paid advertising space within an application.)
2. Circulation - more than 10,000,000
3. 5 year duration
4. World
Cost: $3,390 each

And that's less than I would accept for this, let alone 20%. Sounds like the Getty sales team needs to be let go for "selling" these licenses for $60 each.
JoeGough
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:40PM
Posted By CraigRJD:

Sean, thanks again for the lead you have taken on this issue.
utors

The fact that you could download all 6000+ images within a short period of learning about this perfectly highlights the issues ...


Hear, hear. Thanks again Sean. You do have an extraordinary ability to encapsulate the real issues and express the concerns of your fellow contributors. Cheers.


My flabber is well and truly gasted by these developments and the embarrassed, belated and miserable admissions from Getty/Istock management. No wonder that they didn't want to announce these deals publically.
contrastaddict
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:40PM

Posted By mr_erin:
  • There may eventually be additional content added to this pool/agreement, but at the moment there are no concrete plans



Well based on your current track record, I think its safe to assume that a lot more content will be added in the future.
PixelEmbargo
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsMember is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Illustration downloads
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:48PM
Posted By HeliRy:

I'm starting to get the feeling that IS/Getty are making an effort to get the highest earning contributors to drop their crowns in frustration. I would bet that the 100 people whose images are used in this Google thing are in the upper echelon of earners here.

Think IS would shed a tear if it's top earners dropped their crowns? Nope, they'd be doing back flips down the hallways.


Non exclusives are also included in this "deal". So dropping the crown won't help.

(Edited on 2013-01-11 18:49:13 by PixelEmbargo)
tjhunt
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:51PM
This Cosby quote seems apropos:

"My father established our relationship when I was seven years old. He looked at me and said, 'You know, I brought you in this world, and I can take you out. And it don't make no difference to me, I'll make another one look just like you.'"

Maybe it's time we started thinking along those lines. 

(Edited on 2013-01-11 18:52:03 by tjhunt)
JodiJacobson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:52PM
I'm one of the lucky 100 with multiple images...wish I was that lucky in the lottery.  As this is NOT a promotional event, I want my extended license fee and amounts to be downloaded strictly enforced. I don't see anywhere in our contributer agreement that a customer can buy an image and give it away free. I still think we have a breech of contract here. Please show me the paragraph that allows such activity especially since you made it clear this isn't a promotion. I want my metadata back in my images, as that is how they were given to you to distribute.

If I uploaded a file with a Model release without metadata it would be rejected because you couldn't match the dates properly. I have pictures with children on google and I want them off. I want all my images off Google unless I am properly compensated and protected. This is a formal notice and will also send support the same notice.

(Edited on 2013-01-11 18:55:00 by JodiJacobson)
michaeldb
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Illustration downloads
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:53PM
Posted By Maridav:
...Is it correctly understood that the images will stay on google drive even after having deleted them on iStock? If yes, then for how long will they be available for free download?

Yes, please answer these questions. If we request to have our iStock accounts completely closed, will our images then be removed from Google Drive (one of mine is on there, so far, and I want it off - it used to make a lot of money for me, before Getty started giving it away for free).
Box5
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:53PM
Maybe iStock/Getty should just offer our images to Shutterstock. They could get a nice profit for themself and we could get $12 for each image available on the worlds leading provider of subscription microstock images.
stacey_newman
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:56PM

you may have the legal right according the ambiguity of the ASA, but ethically you oughta be ashamed. you are devaluing our work every time we turn around and to what end? my images aren't included in either the MS or the Google debaucle thus far, but this issue affects every single one of us, particularly exclusives, whether our images are currently involved or not.


the only way to avoid having images placed in these types of deals is to remove our content from all partner programs, collections that are mirrored etc...? is this correct?
BrendanHunter
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:07PM
I'm not confident that the legality of this would stand up. 


I would also express my concern that this was shared late on a Friday. Leaving it all weekend without official oversight only means we have two full days to speculate and get angry. 


 

(Edited on 2013-01-11 19:07:45 by BrendanHunter)
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 41 to 60 of 657 matches.
Not a member?Join