Alamy

Of course I remember! It was actually in response to you saying you don’t need to bother asking as the answer will be “waffle” - not in response to the selling of an RM image as RF. The conversation is public on my Twitter feed where I eventually ducked out of the conversation (after saying so) due to the fact that I felt you were being increasingly hostile to each one of my replies. The limited, single electronic editorial use licence of the RM image you raised in that conversation claiming to be RF was far from being so, as detailed in the licence itself. “Perpetuity”

(Last post from me in this thread) You're right - uploads, registrations and (significantly for this discussion) uploads from existing (not new) contributors are up. Of course our intention is not to “endlessly syphon revenue from contributors” and we feel that we are building towards an end goal that will ultimately be advantageous to our contributors as well as our customers. Best, James A

I was merely listing the remaining reasons why I personally believe it’s worthwhile marking images as exclusive to alamy. To be clear, despite exclusivity being an advantage when it comes to some negotiations, for the majority it doesn’t have an impact and with only 7% of images marked as exclusive (with many incorrectly marked as such) it was not a commercially significant element to our overall offering. As previously mentioned though, we have not seen a significant drop in the % of images marked as exclusive to Alamy since the change has come into place and for the pla

The reality is that the data does not reflect your guess - a minuscule % of images were removed or taken to non-exclusive status as a result of this commission change.

Hi Ian, I agree there is less incentive now to remain exclusive to Alamy compared to previously, and everyone within the business is aware of this, however the benefits as I see them are: You won’t be “competing” with yourself across other agents. In many cases, the main competition for Alamy are with sites that have a far lower average sale price than us. Placing portfolios there which will average out at a significantly lower average price means it can impact the rate of sales here where our average price is much closer to $30 and can often go much higher. Many buyer

Not a figure we can make public I'm afraid as it would give too much insight into commercially sensitive sales information. I understand this response will be disappointing / not the answer you were looking for but it's the reality. James A

That's true - and I should clarify, it would be more accurate for me to have said 7% of images rather than photographers because as has been pointed out, many contributors had a mix.

Please do not to take my conversation with Phil out of context - my point was that ultimately the change in commission structure was a business decision to balance the needs of shareholders, customers, staff, contributors etc that allows us to get us where we need to be for future success. The commission structure change affected roughly 7% of the contributor base (EDIT: I should clarify it was 7% of IMAGES) so for the vast majority, the 60/40 deal was already in place for those who don't qualify for platinum. I enjoyed catching up with lots of Alamy contributors - some who post he

Hi Commission is calculated at date of invoice, not date of download. Taking distribution as an example, we take download date into consideration if a distributor has used an image after you have opted out of the scheme. In this case if the distributor downloaded the image before you opted out, they are still able to use the image. However the commission wouldn't be calculated until they invoiced the use. We understand the frustration here but as we report images to you when they happen rather than when we have received money unfortunately images do sometimes get refund

Hi all, The stock industry is very competitive and we do have to compete with our competitors or we risk loosing customers, and therefore sales. In order to do this we have to offer discounts, but also image packs. We aren't the only company to offer image packs, and our average licence fee has maintained over the last few years. Our sales teams work extremely hard to negotiate on deals with all forms of customers and always try to get the best market value possible for each license. Thanks, Alamy

Hi All We have spoken to our technical team about the drop in views and zooms you have reported and they have identified an issue with the log processing for zooms, search and views in Alamy Measures. They are working on fixing this and processing the backlogs as soon as possible. Unfortunately this means that Alamy measures will not be updating until the backlogs are processed. Just to clarify, this issue is with Alamy Measures and not with the actual search. Your images are still searchable for customers. Apologies for the inconvenience.

You're not told "go do it yourself". For the UUQ type infringements there is a queue, which means delays for you. You are therefore given the option for us not to pursue it, and then you pursue directly yourself. You can choose to do that or not. For your previous question, we can't share that data publicly for obvious reasons (no business would) and this is a newly formed team. Broadly speaking though, we are currently processing several thousand cases, expect this to grow significantly and typically have a starting point fee of around 5x the regular licence (as per o

I posted this in another thread but in case that gets missed: For clarity, there are two strands to our approach for image infringements - the proactive process and the reactive process. Image use infringements are a reality of our industry. Sometimes the infringement will be down to a mistake an existing customer has made and sometimes it will be a literal image theft and use, often stolen from an existing legitimate use. In Q1 of this year, Alamy put together a dedicated team to proactively tackle this. We are working with multiple external infringement servi

For clarity, there are two strands to our approach for image infringements - the proactive process and the reactive process. Image use infringements are a reality of our industry. Sometimes the infringement will be down to a mistake an existing customer has made and sometimes it will be a literal image theft and use, often stolen from an existing legitimate use. In Q1 of this year, Alamy put together a dedicated team to proactively tackle this. We are working with multiple external infringement services to crawl the web and secure funds for images that have originated from

Without even quoting our forum rules I'm sure everyone here can appreciate that using the official Alamy forum to push traffic away to other forums (personal, business or even Facebook) is never going to be an appropriate thing to post here. Any future posts of this nature will be removed. Best James A

Hi all, We've raised this issue with our IT team and hope to have it fixed as soon as possible for you. Kind regards, Alamy

Hi all, We're aware of the issue and have raised it with our IT team - we hope to have it fixed as soon as possible for you. Kind regards, Alamy

Really no need to take things out of context in this way. Old code, mistakenly reused, quickly removed and corrected. Again, we're sorry for the confusion this has caused. James A

This is nothing to do with future plans - it's quite the opposite. When moving over to a new internal system, some older dormant code was mistakenly reinstated (many, many years ago we had some commission models with storage fees). This was quickly spotted, fixed and any fees were refunded. In total this affected no more than 160 contributors. Apologies to any of you who were left confused by this. Best, James A Head of Content

When moving over to a new internal system, some older dormant code was mistakenly reinstated (many, many years ago we had some commission models with storage fees). This was quickly spotted, fixed and any fees were refunded. In total this affected no more than 160 contributors. Apologies to any of you who were left confused by this. Best, James A Head of Content

When moving over to a new internal system, some older dormant code was mistakenly reinstated (many, many years ago we had some commission models with storage fees). This was quickly spotted, fixed and any fees were refunded. In total this affected no more than 160 contributors. Apologies to any of you who were left confused by this. Best, James A Head of Content

Hi All, Apologies for the inconvenience that this has caused. We are working on this and can assure you that this will be fixed as soon as possible. Thanks, Alamy

Hi All, Apologies for the inconvenience that this has caused. We are working on this and can assure you that this will be fixed as soon as possible. Thanks, Alamy

Hi All We feel this thread has gone a little off topic so we will be locking this now. Thanks, Alamy

Hi Any queries regarding Stockimo should be sent to support@stockimo.com. Thanks, Alamy