DACS Strategies 2020

[geogphotos]

On 21/02/2020 at 18:27, Reimar said:

I claim for UK licenses and for other countries that specify a territory of worldwide.  These will also be available in the UK.

 

 

I only claim for specified UK use. This is what DACS advised me to do. 

 

This would make a very large difference to the numbers on my claim. 

 

There really should be consistency.

Edited February 23, 2020 by geogphotos

[NYCat]

3 hours ago, Sally said:

It’s a useful search. Found a few book uses. I also found a photo of mine being offered for sale on another website site in Brazil. Is this an Alamy distributor (I can’t find the list of them)?
https://www.fotoarena.com.br/

 

Here you go...  https://www.alamy.com/contactus/local-distributors.aspx

 

Paulette

 

 

[spacecadet]

15 hours ago, Cryptoprocta said:

I assume I'm not seeing the answer to this question for looking at it, but I can assure you I've been trying (and I'm sure the answer is on the DACS site somewhere)

When DACS says, and I didn't notice it last year (maybe it's new?), " Edit your claim and provide the ISBN for books, ISSN for magazines or a URL if your work has been published on a website. "

In the FAQs they say, " You can also add website URLs onto your Publication History list. All we need is the main website address, not the specific page your image features on. For example, www.dacs.org.uk "

Do they mean any website that we can find, any UK website, or ...?

TIA

This was a bolt from the blue- I hadn't even looked at it until you pointed it out as it's contrary to what DACS have always said up to now.

Anway I've gone through and put half a dozen up- too many to do a full job, but if it seems to make a difference to my claim I'll try harder next time. Thanks for spotting it.

[John Mitchell]

5 hours ago, spacecadet said:

This was a bolt from the blue- I hadn't even looked at it until you pointed it out as it's contrary to what DACS have always said up to now.

Anway I've gone through and put half a dozen up- too many to do a full job, but if it seems to make a difference to my claim I'll try harder next time. Thanks for spotting it.

 

Does this apply to photos used in e-books that don't have ISBN's?

Edited February 23, 2020 by John Mitchell

[John Mitchell]

10 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

I only claim for specified UK use. This is what DACS advised me to do. 

 

This would make a very large difference to the numbers on my claim. 

 

There really should be consistency.

 

I've decided to do the same again this year for similar reasons. A sudden rise in my claim numbers would probably be questioned.

[shearwater]

10 hours ago, Sally said:

It’s a useful search. Found a few book uses. I also found a photo of mine being offered for sale on another website site in Brazil. Is this an Alamy distributor (I can’t find the list of them)?
https://www.fotoarena.com.br/

 

Hello Sally,

Yes, Fotoarena is the Brazil distributor.

You can check all of them here: https://www.alamy.com/contactus/local-distributors.aspx

Regards

 

Edit: Sorry, found just after my post that NYCat forwarded you above. 😅

Edited February 23, 2020 by shearwater
Duplicated info

[Sally]

12 minutes ago, shearwater said:

 

Hello Sally,

Yes, Fotoarena is the Brazil distributor.

You can check all of them here: https://www.alamy.com/contactus/local-distributors.aspx

Regards

 

Edit: Sorry, found just after my post that NYCat forwarded you above. 😅

Cheers, yes that makes sense. Thanks and also to NYCat

[Cryptoprocta]

2 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Does this apply to photos used in e-books that don't have ISBN's?

I can't find any more clarification than I found earlier. Has anyone else found any? There are several ways the little info I found can be interpreted. For example, I was wondering if it would refer to online versions of print magazines, or online magazines. But when they give www.dacs.org.uk as an example (though only an example of giving the home page of a website) that could even imply 'any website'. I've chosen to do the print/online magazine route, for the moment unless someone finds definite information in the next 12 hours, as I'll be out tomorrow until the close time). I assume they'll inform me if I'm wrong.

[John Mitchell]

40 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

I can't find any more clarification than I found earlier. Has anyone else found any? There are several ways the little info I found can be interpreted. For example, I was wondering if it would refer to online versions of print magazines, or online magazines. But when they give www.dacs.org.uk as an example (though only an example of giving the home page of a website) that could even imply 'any website'. I've chosen to do the print/online magazine route, for the moment unless someone finds definite information in the next 12 hours, as I'll be out tomorrow until the close time). I assume they'll inform me if I'm wrong.

 

I just took the plunge and pressed the "submit" button on DACS Part I. Had enough of looking for phantom ISBN's.

 

It will be awhile before I get to Part II. Fortunately, it's relatively easy.

[Andy G]

From the DACS website - Has your work ever appeared in a UK book, magazine or TV programme?

Guess that means not on the web but can you give a URL to prove this if you don't have an ISBN or ISSN number.

Last email from DACS (This week) NO worldwide,no World,no EU only claims that state UK explicitly.

Hope this helps.

 

 

[spacecadet]

11 hours ago, Andy G said:

From the DACS website - Has your work ever appeared in a UK book, magazine or TV programme?

Guess that means not on the web but can you give a URL to prove this if you don't have an ISBN or ISSN number.

Last email from DACS (This week) NO worldwide,no World,no EU only claims that state UK explicitly.

Hope this helps.

 

 

It does, most helpful.

So a URL if it helps DACS verify a qualifying use. I get it now.

[Andy G]

So just contacted DACS and you can put UK website URLs where your image has appeared so long as it's not a newspaper or social media,and they will check them, sorry about my second guessing and getting it wrong.

Edited February 24, 2020 by Andy G

[Marianne]

Had so much trouble getting on to the site, when I finally did about 20 minutes ago, I just hit submit with what I had as of Saturday. I guess they'll delete some of mine, but I did put in the amazon uk site where I could - though it was grayed out most of the time so I couldn't add websites. I'll call them in March when they are less crazy - getting voicemail for an overseas call is a drag, and see what I'm supposed to add or delete for when I put in my part 2 claim. 

 

I had a lot more books this year, but some may not have been correct. Maybe they will answer my email so I can correct it for my Part 2 submission. I assume now that I hit submit I can't edit. I was having problems with the site and just hit submit rather than adding or deleting anything, so at least my claim would go through. 

 

I tweeted to them when I couldn't sign on all morning and they replied - and I guess they got the site fixed because I managed to submit just before 11 AM EST (I wasn't sure if we're 5 or 6 hours behind you folks in the UK)  

[Marianne]

2 hours ago, Andy G said:

So just contacted DACS and you can put UK website URLs where your image has appeared so long as it's not a newspaper or social media,and they will check them, sorry about my second guessing and getting it wrong.

 

Does this mean websites in the UK are now admissible? That would add to my claim. I thought it was only print books and magazines (and tv) - e.g. I though ebooks were out. And what does that mean for websites? I guess they have to be .co.uk but what about advertising or other non-magazine sites? Or do they just mean magazine sites if you don't have the ISSN?

What about when book publishers use your image on their blog? I've had that a few times, where my photo is in a book and on the publisher's blog about the book? 

[spacecadet]

2 hours ago, Andy G said:

So just contacted DACS and you can put UK website URLs where your image has appeared so long as it's not a newspaper or social media,and they will check them, sorry about my second guessing and getting it wrong.

Still useful. You still get a trophy icon.

[Marianne]

On 23/02/2020 at 04:02, Sally said:

It’s a useful search. Found a few book uses. I also found a photo of mine being offered for sale on another website site in Brazil. Is this an Alamy distributor (I can’t find the list of them)?
https://www.fotoarena.com.br/

 

If you click the arrow on the right just under the headline where they show the sites they distribute for, you'll see they claim to be a distributor for Alamy. So, I'd guess you don't need to worry. 

[Alex Ramsay]

On 21/02/2020 at 23:26, Marianne said:

I thought that books available in the UK were fine and didn't think to question it until I had some of my books removed from my list last year,

 

 

 

DACS makes it pretty clear that it's only available for books/magazines actually published in the UK.

 

Alex

[Marianne]

1 hour ago, Alex Ramsay said:

 

DACS makes it pretty clear that it's only available for books/magazines actually published in the UK.

 

Alex

 

I don't know why I was so confused. Could be that I've had a series of migraines this week and there has been discussion about whether "worldwide" was applicable in the past. I could not remember what I did last year and started adding to my list before I thought about it and then didn't recall what I'd added. Spent most of the weekend sleeping. Relieved I'm well today and worried about not getting it in since I could not log in until about an hour before it was due, just hit submit. 

[Cryptoprocta]

1 hour ago, Marianne said:

 

I don't know why I was so confused. Could be that I've had a series of migraines this week and there has been discussion about whether "worldwide" was applicable in the past.

 

It very definitely was applicable in the past.

The first time Alamy wrote to me directly and told me I had 'whatever number of' relevant images, the only way I could get the figures to match was to lump UK and Worldwide. So I included both types and that was fine. A couple of years later, I was reading here people saying that Worldwide didn't count, so I put my submission into DACS early and specifically asked if my figures were OK, and they said my application was good to go. Then last year my DACs income was reduced considerably, which I guessed was probably as they had discarded all my Worldwide files, but they didn't tell me that was the case.

[Marianne]

52 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

It very definitely was applicable in the past.

The first time Alamy wrote to me directly and told me I had 'whatever number of' relevant images, the only way I could get the figures to match was to lump UK and Worldwide. So I included both types and that was fine. A couple of years later, I was reading here people saying that Worldwide didn't count, so I put my submission into DACS early and specifically asked if my figures were OK, and they said my application was good to go. Then last year my DACs income was reduced considerably, which I guessed was probably as they had discarded all my Worldwide files, but they didn't tell me that was the case.

 

Mine went down  too (about 11%) but I think that they said that last year a lot more people applied for payback so the percentage people got went down. 

I wrote to DACS and asked last year and this year too, and hopefully this year I'll hear back before putting in the April portion of my claim. 

[Alex Ramsay]

13 hours ago, Marianne said:

 

Mine went down  too (about 11%) but I think that they said that last year a lot more people applied for payback so the percentage people got went down. 

I wrote to DACS and asked last year and this year too, and hopefully this year I'll hear back before putting in the April portion of my claim. 

 

It was the same when they started allowing claims for Dutch PLR - hardly anyone applied the first year and the payout was very generous indeed - but a dramatic drop followed over the next couple of years as more and more people heard about it and applied.

 

Alex

[spacecadet]

Mine was only boosted by the one-off VG Bildkunst payment. Otherwise it was a good 30% down.

[geogphotos]

From DACS:

 

"Worldwide uses are not accepted as part of the reports submitted to claim for Payback. The region stated on the sales report documentation must state ‘UK’ or ‘Untied Kingdom’ for it to be included in your claim.

 

The money received for Payback from the CLA covers UK publications only. We need to be sure that all claims received are eligible, so sales documentation used as validation of claims are checked through, and claims reduced or rejected if anything other than UK specific publications are included."

 

Untied Kingdom must be a current affairs comment 😃

Edited February 25, 2020 by geogphotos

[John Mitchell]

55 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

From DACS:

 

"Worldwide uses are not accepted as part of the reports submitted to claim for Payback. The region stated on the sales report documentation must state ‘UK’ or ‘Untied Kingdom’ for it to be included in your claim.

 

The money received for Payback from the CLA covers UK publications only. We need to be sure that all claims received are eligible, so sales documentation used as validation of claims are checked through, and claims reduced or rejected if anything other than UK specific publications are included."

 

Untied Kingdom must be a current affairs comment 😃

 

Thanks for that. I'll stick with UK then.

 

Hope you blokes can stay United. Things aren't looking too good in Canada these days. 🤨

[Charles Stirling]

On 23/02/2020 at 19:09, John Mitchell said:

 

Does this apply to photos used in e-books that don't have ISBN's?

Found a list of types of publications that can't be claimed on and DACs says can't claim on e-books.