geogphotos

Please provide ISBN details

Recommended Posts

Alamy    0
3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

We promise to read everything posted if you promise to keep all posts constructive, deal?

 

I wonder if Alamy could let us know if they are joining Picsel and in general what approach the company is taking to the subject of secondary rights payment claims  in the changing landscape that we have in 2017.

 

We currently only work with DACS however we speak to Picsel regularly and have a good relationship with them. 

 

Aside from confidentiality issues and agreements we have with customers, providing ISBN numbers takes up time and resources from within the business. They are not always as simple to identify as you may imagine. This is why we take a commission if you get us claim this for you and why we don't provide the information for free. 

 

Alamy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195

Thanks for the clarification Alamy. Two FINAL questions please.

 

Am I correct that only those Alamy contributors who had informed you by the cut-off date of July 30th 2016 should be making their own direct DACS claims for Alamy sales?

 

And, secondly, has DACS been made aware of those Alamy contributors who can and cannot make direct claims for Alamy sales? I'm thinking of the avoidance of double claims. 

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

Subject to clause 28.1, You authorise Alamy to grant to the Collecting Societya mandate to negotiate, claim and administer the rights in respect of Secondary Uses of your Images that you have authorised Alamy to represent you for.

You also confirm that for sales made by Alamy you authorise Alamy to grant to the Collecting Society an exclusive licence. Exclusivity is limited to the actual uses of the Images claimed and paid for under the Collecting Society’s collection scheme only (“Collection”).

Alamy will grant the Collecting Society a mandate to claim on your behalf a share of royalties arising from these rights collectively licensed by the Collecting Society as Secondary Uses and distributed through Collection.

For the avoidance of doubt, the above authorisation extends only to Secondary Uses of Images that the Collecting Society manages through collective licensing schemes and does not transfer any authority to the Collecting Society to issue individual Licences for Primary Uses on your behalf, nor does it transfer the ownership of copyright to the Collecting Society.

You also confirm that you have authorised Alamy to claim and receive on your behalf any royalty payments the Collecting Society has calculated as part of Collection in respect of an authorised claim made on your behalf by Alamy, and to deduct a commission or fee of 50% after recouping any applicable administration charges.

  1. If you have specifically informed us not to claim on your behalf for Collection in the United Kingdom before July 30th 2016 then we will not claim for you under Collection unless instructed to do so. If you do instruct us to claim on your behalf this will continue for the contract duration.
Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alamy    0

Hi Ian,

 

We will not make claims for contributors who were on our previous contract who had advised us to not claim for them by July 2016 when the contract was updated. 

 

We have a good relationship with DACS and they inform us if there is any cross over - for example if they receive a claim from us for an individual Alamy photographer and have a direct claim from the same photographer, they have agreed to notify us and we then cancel our claim. This ensures the photographer is not out of pocket.

 

For any other questions you should just email contributors@alamy.com - this is not a Q+A section of the forum, it's an area to post suggestions that we will read. The contributor relations team will be happy to help.

 

Cheers 

 

Alamy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JeffGreenberg    358

The stance it takes is that agencies are Rights Holders

 

Absolutely NOT copyright holders, unless specifically transferred by contrib.

What other rights?  What if future contract change requires agency to collect DACS?

What percentage of contribs will ultimately sign rather than drop out of agency...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195
14 hours ago, JeffGreenberg said:

 

 

Deleted -  posted incorrect interpretation.

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195

Trying to get this straight still.

 

So, the new contract mandates Alamy to claim DACS, except for those who opted out by 30 July 2016. But contributors are still able to make their own DACs claims, and then Alamy will cancel their one in that contributors name once they are informed by DACS.

 

It takes time and effort ( a cost) for Alamy to get all the ISBN/ISSN data needed, and there are also confidentiality issues, so that is why they do not provide ISBN/ISSN information for those making their own claim. 

 

For contributors it is a decision to make to either go it alone with incomplete information or let Alamy have 50% of a possibly larger pot. That pot is going to change, but we don't yet know exactly how, as a larger percentage of it is linked to actual real-world data collected by CLA. At present for those who are at the Max in books and magazines it is still worthwhile making a direct DACS claim, but that calculation/estimation is going to change each year as the new system is implemented.

 

Is this an accurate summary of the situation? What have I missed or got wrong?

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alamy    0

Hi Ian

If you're asking for Alamy to confirm or deny your summary then please email contributors@alamy.com with your questions. As we said yesterday, this is not a Q+A section of the forum, it's an area to post suggestions that we will read. The contributor relations team will be happy to help.

 

Thanks

Alamy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195
16 minutes ago, Alamy said:

Hi Ian

If you're asking for Alamy to confirm or deny your summary then please email contributors@alamy.com with your questions. As we said yesterday, this is not a Q+A section of the forum, it's an area to post suggestions that we will read. The contributor relations team will be happy to help.

 

Thanks

Alamy

 

Yes, understood. 

 

I was asking forum members not expecting an 'official' reply. :)

 

But while you are here ;), since I am already ( and there must be many in the same situation) in the maximum categories for books, mags and so on ( all except TV uses and the new ISBN/ISSN percentage pot) and getting something like £800-£1000 pa inc VAT it just wouldn't make financial sense to hand 50% to Alamy for the remaining bits and bobs.

 

Most of the work has already been done and claimed for.

 

Not expecting an answer just thinking aloud......How about some compromise and a lower percentage take for supplying the missing info for those max-ed out in most categories? Wouldn't that be a win-win?

 

 

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M.Chapman    519

I just contacted contributor services on this matter. I'm currently "opted out" and making my own DACs claims. Paraphrased Q&A as follows.

 

Q1. Are Alamy making DACs claims on behalf of opted in contributors for a share of both the DACs "regular" and the new "distinct royalty" pots?

A1. Yes

Q2. How many ISBN numbers do Alamy know for my sales?

A2. As we are not claiming DACS on your behalf this year we don’t know any of the ISBN numbers so we can’t tell you how many we would have claimed for but it is likely to have been the same if not more than you claimed for. It is a lot of extra work for us to find out this information which is why we take a cut.

 

This makes it difficult to know whether I'd be better off asking Alamy to claim on my behalf or not. In my case it all depends on wether Alamy know (or can find) significantly more ISBN numbers than I have already tracked down...

 

At the moment I think I'll stick with making my own claims until I see the relative sizes of the payments I receive from each DACs pot. I just need to keep searching for those publications. Thank goodness for the "Have you found and images" forum thread and Google reverse image search.

Edited by M.Chapman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195
1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

I just contacted contributor services on this matter. I'm currently "opted out" and making my own DACs claims. Paraphrased Q&A as follows.

 

Q1. Are Alamy making DACs claims on behalf of opted in contributors for a share of both the DACs "regular" and the new "distinct royalty" pots?

A1. Yes

Q2. How many ISBN numbers do Alamy know for my sales?

A2. As we are not claiming DACS on your behalf this year we don’t know any of the ISBN numbers so we can’t tell you how many we would have claimed for but it is likely to have been the same if not more than you claimed for. It is a lot of extra work for us to find out this information which is why we take a cut.

 

This makes it difficult to know whether I'd be better off asking Alamy to claim on my behalf or not. In my case it all depends on wether Alamy know (or can find) significantly more ISBN numbers than I have already tracked down...

 

At the moment I think I'll stick with making my own claims until I see the relative sizes of the payments I receive from each DACs pot. I just need to keep searching for those publications. Thank goodness for the "Have you found and images" forum thread and Google reverse image search.

 

 

I do know that some smaller agencies are able to provide this ISBN information on a routine basis and wonder if a change in Alamy workflow or reporting requirements  could not overcome this necessity  to charge 50% of our entitlement for after all is some fairly routine information. 

 

I only have a few direct sales each year from my website but each time I get asked to send an invoice I have been given the full details of the publication and the ISBN number. 

 

My criticism of the current system is that it pits agency and contributor against each other or at least has the potential to do so.

 

Let's me straight as things are Alamy has a financial incentive not to provide us with the information we need. And that potential or actual conflict is not helpful in our relationship.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a stupid question, when, where and how does Alamy collect ISBN numbers? I don't see a requirement for that when going through the checkout process, nor yields a search for "ISBN" in the licensing agreement any hits. Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195

Can't answer that Martin. This was the information provided for one of my direct sales:

 

Licence for image 11IDM1749 Easington Gas Terminal

 

Geography for xxxxxx A Level Year 1 &AS

ISBN:        9780198366454

 World All Languages plus Digital (non-exclusive) for a duration of 10 years (to cover all print runs during that time)

Page    Description    Image Number    Credit    Fee

144    Easington Gas Terminal    11IDM1749        xxxxx

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Obviously personal views/thoughts, so not offence intended Ian).

 

Checking my own sales (contributor since 2004) which includes a fair bit of books, front covers and inside placements (if that make a difference I don't know) - can't find a single ISBN provided and can't recall I've ever seen one.

 

"An ISBN is assigned to each edition and variation (except reprintings) of a book. For example, an e-book, a paperback and a hardcover edition of the same book would each have a different ISBN." 

 

So you have been supplied that info on one (or a few) sale? Can't imagining Alamy willy-nilly supplying/not supplying it which means I can only conclude that the on-going record-keeping of ISBNs aren't very thorough or exhaustive, or perhaps in many/most cases not really acquired before actually processing DACS claims for opt-in contributors (?). So I'm sorry, but I don't think it is reasonable to think that it is in Alamy's (or any other agency), nor opt-in contributor's, interest to subsidize opt-out contributors. Alamy should stay focused on selling licenses, as many as possible - the hunt for tear-sheets or ISBNs is something one have to do on their own time or "pay" for having it done for you. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love for it to be different, but I can't see it being reasonably "demanded".

Edited by Martin Carlsson
spelling mistake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195

"the hunt for tear-sheets or ISBNs is something one have to do on their own time or "pay" for having it done for you"

 

I'd be quite happy to pay for Alamy finding ISBN numbers for me. But they won't do it unless I hand over the entire claim. As a consequence it won't get done.


"Alamy should stay focused on selling licenses, as may as possible"

 

I agree. But doesn't hunting for ISBNs for the opt-in claims detract from selling licenses?  I do my claim independently, yours depends on Alamy spending time on it instead of being 'focused on selling licenses'. It should be me complaining not you!;)

 

If agencies cannot easily find ISBNs then the new system is even more crazy than I had thought.

 

I have not "demanded" anything. I have asked some questions.

 

NB) The sales information above was from one of my very few direct sales. It is what the publisher provided when requesting my invoice. I have no idea if it is normal practice or an exception.

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M.Chapman    519
2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

"the hunt for tear-sheets or ISBNs is something one have to do on their own time or "pay" for having it done for you"

 

I'd be quite happy to pay for Alamy finding ISBN numbers for me. But they won't do it unless I hand over the entire claim. As a consequence it won't get done.

 

I suspect the issue is that taking their 50% for the regular DACs claim is very easy money for Alamy (they have all the required info, and they may even have automated the claim process?)

 

But, submitting the claim for the "distinct royalty pot" is much harder as they haven't got all the ISBN/ISSN numbers. Finding the numbers they don't have will time consuming, and they may struggle to make money on that activity.  I imagine Alamy may be trying it this year to see how it goes. At the moment, like us, they have little idea how much they will receive from the distinct royalty pot but, in the meantime, they don't want to loose the easy 50% from the regular claim pot, which is why they won't allow us to handle part of the claim ourselves.

 

I notice Alamy didn't make a big "song and dance" about the fact they they were now going to make claims on the distinct royalty pot to tempt more contributors to "opt in" (if they did I missed it). So I suspect they are proceeding cautiously to see how profitable the new claim regime is.

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195
4 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

I suspect the issue is that taking their 50% for the regular DACs claim is very easy money for Alamy (they have all the required info, and they may even have automated the claim process?)

 

But, submitting the claim for the "distinct royalty pot" is much harder as they haven't got all the ISBN/ISSN numbers. Finding the numbers they don't have will time consuming, and they may struggle to make money on that activity.

 

 

Probably it's true that this year will be something of a trial for all concerned.

 

But as this pot is going to be 40% ( for education) in five years time it might be a good idea for Alamy to start collecting ISBN data as a matter of routine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geogphotos    195

In addition to stock I sell books on Amazon ( buy from geogphotos :D).

 

If you type in a title ( surely Alamy has that information?) you can get the ISBN in seconds.

 

I'd also think it fairly straightforward that when customers send in their reports of pictures used that they are asked to include relevant ISBN numbers. 

 

As I said in reply to Martin I don't know at what stage of the book production/image licensing process ISBN numbers are issued, but would assume that they are in place by the time of payment.

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

"the hunt for tear-sheets or ISBNs is something one have to do on their own time or "pay" for having it done for you"

 

(1) I'd be quite happy to pay for Alamy finding ISBN numbers for me. But they won't do it unless I hand over the entire claim. As a consequence it won't get done.


"Alamy should stay focused on selling licenses, as may as possible"

 

(2) I agree. But doesn't hunting for ISBNs for the opt-in claims detract from selling licenses?  I do my claim independently, yours depends on Alamy spending time on it instead of being 'focused on selling licenses'. It should be me complaining not you!;)

 

If agencies cannot easily find ISBNs then the new system is even more crazy than I had thought.

 

(3) I have not "demanded" anything. I have asked some questions.

 

(4) NB) The sales information above was from one of my very few direct sales. It is what the publisher provided when requesting my invoice. I have no idea if it is normal practice or an exception.

 

1) Opportunity for cherry picking or deals favoring the "creator" would be fantastic, but unfortunately not the current reality - "one just have to like/get on with the situation" (swedish saying). The deal on the table is all in or all out, but love the attempt for a third partial option. Those with ample time and/or stubbornness as a trait are probably better off financially doing it on their own.

 

2) I would assume that Alamy use the 50% cut from opt-ins to cover costs and of course make a profit, just like when selling licenses.

 

3) "demanded" - didn't mean it like "that". Push, query, demand - go for it.

 

4) I thought you meant through Alamy. Regardless, I can't recall ever getting any ISBN info through direct sales either (Photoshelter). 

 

Anyhow, just back in from a long walk through the local nature reserve and enjoying a cup of tea whilst importing a batch of long exposures and weirdo abstracts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now