SvetlanaSF

I may have misunderstood that, apologies then. But, obviously, it's late to claim direct for this year. I was trying to assess if my not having payment by now meant that it wasn't coming at all, if everyone has already gotten theirs.

If I believe the Alamy FAQ here, there is no place for me to opt in, so I don't think I missed anything: https://www.alamy.com/contributor/faqs/most-frequently-asked-questions/?section=9 Q. I would like you to claim DACS payments from Alamy sales, how do I do this?A. You don’t need to do anything. Unless you opted out for DACS Payback by the 30th July 2016 (see contributor contract clause 28 and 28.1) then we’ll automatically claim for all eligible licenses on your behalf. Q. I had to sign a form last year, do you need a form from me this year?A. DACS have changed the way they want us to work this year. They don’t need a form from each individual, they just need one from us as your representative.

Has everyone gotten their payout from Alamy? Is it now safe to say that if I didn't, nothing has been claimed? I'm thinking I should register direct next year as I certainly found publications but nothing has been deposited into my account. Probably easier to pinpoint these to DACS directly

No worries and thanks anyway! I'll do some digging

Does anyone know if there is a similar process for the US-based publications?

We may have different upbringings. But yes, I find it rude to reiterate something that's been said, without adding anything new. It is pretty much the same as calling the person you are addressing an idiot for not being able to understand that from reading it once. Call me strange, but I don't do that to other people. Now, how constructive was your trolling? It was not. So may I suggest we stick to the topic of the conversation?

That's a great advice! I can work on that before end of year, to claim direct for the 2020 sales then. Thanks a lot for the help, @Bryan

Super helpful, thanks @geogphotos!

@Colblimp, I saw that. But given that Bryan said "As I understand it", I'm looking to have that validated. Don't think it's that productive to copy/paste the answers that were already given. Actually, I find that rude.

Thanks for the explanation, Bryan! Do I need to do anything on my end to allow Alamy to claim it on my behalf? I don't recall receiving anything from them asking my permission, so I wonder if I need to initiate it. I don't work with Alamy exclusively, and I don't know of an easy way to track the use in print, so I can't even imagine how I'd go about registering with DACS directly, if I have to provide the info on the use of my images first... Any ideas would be much appreciated!

Can someone on this thread explain how this works for the Alamy contributors? Do I have to sign up for something? I read info in the link that was shared here, but seems like it would be difficult for me to hunt down any existing publications to present as proof, so I'm interested in the non-direct route. Appreciate the help!

That's a helpful perspective. I haven't considered clients reviewing/rejecting proposals. Makes sense that it could take time. I think I'll continue to observe the frequency and if it continues to grow, I might flag it to Alamy. Thanks for your help, Joseph

You made me wonder here and I think you are right. So I went further in the sale history. The sale I saw posted on 10 July 2019, but the reversal, which was the same day, has this description: "Sale refunded - Original sale date (25 June 2019)". There is indeed that same image sold on 25 June 2019, at the same price that was refunded. It was then repurchased at a lower price. So that makes sense. But 15 days seems too long of a period for refunds, especially if the image was purchased for "One time use only". 2+ weeks is more than enough to use it, and get the full value...

I'm curious if anyone else is noticing an upwards moving trend for sales reversals? I've had 3 in the last 3 months and it's 3 more than I've had in a year prior. One of the reversals was even for an amount that was higher than the original earnings! This seems very suspicious that someone would be allowed access to a full resolution file and then be able to return it, without us knowing whether the photo has already been used, or if a copy will be retained by customers.

Reading on the T's&C's of Novel Use, I don't see it listed anywhere that the prices would be lower in this category. I can gather that it might be implied in the language, but is that sufficient to legally consider us warned? "You have: 1. Increased sales opportunities. 2. The chance to sell to new and exciting markets" Where is the proper definition and who decides if a photo qualifies for Novel Use and why the buyer would be able to use the photo in perpetuity when paying so little? The UK Newspaper description states it clearly: "Important Points: This may result in average prices lower than previously attained."