Jump to content

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Sally said:

Again, unless you are a Platinum contributor, just mark all of your images non-exclusive and Alamy wont chase any possible infringements.

"Around 17 million of the 260 million images for sale on Alamy are marked as exclusive to us. Our aim is to establish that these images really are exclusive and unlock infringements revenue, as exclusive images to Alamy will be given priority for infringement chasing. We will then review our plans to market a unique collection, and the value of this to customers. "

 

At just over 6% of the total images for sale, I can't see exclusivity ever being used as a selling point by Alamy to achieve higher revenues for contributors. If they really had plans to develop a unique collection around exclusive images they would be well on the way to doing so and would be doing everything they could to retain their existing exclusive images. Exclusivity is not, for me, going to increase my commission rate. By the time they've established what is really exclusive and what isn't the infringers will be long gone. Exclusivity at Alamy is dead in the water as far as I'm concerned.   

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sally said:

It's that bit that doesn't allow anyone to know what percentage they are actually getting. AFAIK other infringement services will pay you a smaller percentage if they have to take legal action, but at least you know what the actual amounts are. Otherwise, it is a straightforward split.

 

 

i agree.  In addition these seems to clearly make it as an additional revenue for Contributor, and therefor not including in calculations of Licence Fees for the purpose of determining level.  (this may be an issue when they start playing with thresholds )

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, MizBrown said:

 

Lovely, 20% minus unspecified collection fees and what the lawyers got.  What are the collection fees and will SA/Alamy go after any of the papers owned by SA shareholders?

 

 

 

Certainly open to conflict of interest.

 

Jill

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Russell Watkins said:

 

Thank you. Yes, I had to retire early (from hospital medicine).

 

OK I knew you said you were a medical doctor (and a fellow vegetarian I recall as well). I hope you are ok now in any case. Best of luck with your studies. 😀

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So when is Alamy going to proved the Remainers with a revised contract that clarifies the issues others have raised? 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, MizBrown said:

So when is Alamy going to proved the Remainers with a revised contract that clarifies the issues others have raised? 

 

Careful with your terminology MizBrown. Remainer is a dirty word in some circles and certainly among several  of the PA media publications as well as some people who might be lurking right now.  🤣

Edited by MDM
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

So after 52 pages and the second reply/dictate PA/Alamy are telling us to suck it up or jog on, absolutely appalling but no surprises!

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/05/2021 at 10:01, Alamy said:

Every business makes decisions that balance the needs of its suppliers, customers, staff, community, and shareholders – in the context of the global market. In Alamy’s case, decisions are taken with the goal of long-term growth and sustainability. Profits are reinvested into the business to support this, and we believe our rates to be fair and sustainable.

It's probably more about keeping shareholders happy rather than contributors .. there isn't one post in the 50+ pages saying that a contributor is happy, quite the opposite.

 

I guess we now know where we stand as contributors.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wilkopix said:

 

 

The rate cut is the last straw for me. My new material will now be going exclusively to other more lucrative outlets first. My once exclusive material with Alamy will now be marked as non exclusive and uploaded to several agencies ... I'm in business after all and I now have to find a way to generate the 20% shortfall.

 

Very sad day for loyal Alamy contributors.

 

 

 

 

If your'e staying, then i'd hang fire until the 1st of July, otherwise changing exclusive material to non exclusive now will lose you 10% of any sales till the new contract starts

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alamy said:

Around 17 million of the 260 million images for sale on Alamy are marked as exclusive to us.

This suggests (very strongly) that retaining the 50% for exclusivity would have minimal effect on Alamy's total income (c1.3%) compared to a huge (20%) reduction in the income of photographers who have decided to give their work exclusively to Alamy as well as having put a HUGE effort in the months since the last percentage change into making sure their portfolio was correctly marked as exclusive.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

 

HMMMM!!  🤔

 

Allan

 

 

Totally mealy mouthed. The clarification serems to me to be what we called in my consultinfg days "weasel words". They have not answered the question and with no contract chnage that email is worthless.

Edited by Martin P Wilson
  • Upvote 7
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Phil Robinson said:

This suggests (very strongly) that retaining the 50% for exclusivity would have minimal effect on Alamy's total income (c1.3%) compared to a huge (20%) reduction in the income of photographers who have decided to give their work exclusively to Alamy as well as having put a HUGE effort in the months since the last percentage change into making sure their portfolio was correctly marked as exclusive.

 

and not only that, these 17 million images are the area they focus their one big new initiative of 2021.. And now they are literally telling people to change that label.  I will have images with Alamy that meet their definition of Exclusive, but there will be No way for them to know, because they are forcing me to change that label..Makes no sense.... 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am not going to waste any more time on this matter, I have bnetter things to do, my PhD for a start.. I will go away and make my plans including the decision as to whether I leave my content with Alamy or not, and build a community around my own website. I may pop in very occasionally.

 

If I decide to leave I wioll be back before 1 July to say my goodbyes.

 

Stay in touch, I am not difficult to find.

Edited by Martin P Wilson
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Alamy said:

Why have you removed the incentive to be exclusive for most contributors?

 

Around 17 million of the 260 million images for sale on Alamy are marked as exclusive to us. Our aim is to establish that these images really are exclusive and unlock infringements revenue, as exclusive images to Alamy will be given priority for infringement chasing. We will then review our plans to market a unique collection, and the value of this to customers. We’re aware that this changes the commission incentive for many contributors to sell exclusively with us, although there will be the benefit of potential infringements revenue. This will not stop you selling directly yourself.

If Alamy is going to pursue infringements, does it not make sense for Alamy first to check with the contributor whether they may have sold direct (which is permitted within exclusivity) before chasing the user?  The opportunities for Alamy embarrassingly to shoot itself in the foot chasing users who are lawfully using directly licensed images are all too obvious.  Embarrassing for Alamy, and embarrassing for the contributor and their relationships with their direct licence clients: “buy from me but expect a threatening letter from Alamy” is not the best marketing strap line of recent years.

 

Graham

Edited by Graham
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AndrewP said:

I won't be investing in any new camera gear for a while but at least there'll be an improved website.

 

Mine too, has already moved on considerasbly this week al;one!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

one thing is made clear, there is no discussions anymore.  

 

we now all have decisions and actions to put in place.  

 

 

Decision Time, folks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Graham said:

If Alamy is going to pursue infringements, does it not make sense for Alamy first to check with the contributor whether they may have sold direct (which is permitted within exclusivity) before chasing the user?  The opportunities for Alamy embarrassingly to shoot itself in the foot chasing users who are lawfully using directly licensed images are all too obvious.

 

Graham

 

not too much problem for Alamy:

 

" Where pursuing such infringements if it is found that the Content has been licensed through another licensing platform, Alamy has the right to recoup any fees incurred in the pursuit of any action taken."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

About 80% of my collection on Alamy is currently exclusive. If there are no revisions to the proposed contract I'll be converting all my Alamy images to non-exclusive at end of June and uploading elsewhere. I'm disappointed it's come to this. I've been a long term loyal Alamy contributor (joined in 2010) with all my images 100% exclusive. But the last changes in commission rate by Alamy led me to try some images elsewhere where I found that I can get a comparable or better return / image, revenue is received more quickly, and keywording and uploading is easier (e.g. auto stemming). Nevertheless, I preferred Alamy's business model (ie. not MS) so have stuck with them and hoped they would improve under new management. But, given the response to 50 pages of forum posts, without even the smallest indication that the feedback (which they asked for) is going to make any difference is very disheartening. Alamy - IMHO you're heading in the wrong direction. But it's not yet too late...

 

Mark

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Upvote 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alamy has mentioned that it will be using partners in their copyright enforcement operations.

 

Probably the most aggressive and most active copyright enforcement company is PicRights. It may be that Alamy has engaged the services of PicRights to be the partner in their copyright enforcement operations. I think the new Alamy contract would make PicRights, or any other enforcement operation's job, much easier.

 

https://picrights.com/en-ca/

 

PicRights or other companies like it, unless Alamy clarifies this point, is one of those known unknowns that has to be considered when making decisions regarding your obligations under the Alamy contract.

 

If you are concerned about photographer responsibilities regarding exclusivity, enforcement letters to your own clients, the ability of Alamy to recover costs from you for screwups, then PicRights or not, you should read this.

 

https://www.stripes.com/french-press-agency-drops-copyright-claim-against-ex-pows-group-1.585020

 

As I understand it, PicRights enforcement process is largely automated. The enforcement technology, before being acquired by PicRights, was used by another stock photo agency to send enforcement notices to photographer Carol Highsmith for using one of her own images on her own website. Highsmith lost her lawsuite, but made her point.

 

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/carol-highsmith-getty-images-1-billion-lawsuit-580088

 

Copyright enforcement has become big business, tread with care.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, meanderingemu said:

 

not too much problem for Alamy:

 

" Where pursuing such infringements if it is found that the Content has been licensed through another licensing platform, Alamy has the right to recoup any fees incurred in the pursuit of any action taken."

 

 

Could have been licensed hundreds of times on a micro stock before being taken down and put on Alamy as exclusive.

 

If you don't bother to first ask the contributor why should they be liable for your expenses and fees?

  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

Only around two years ago the 'core' commission to me was 60%.

 

Was that because you were listed on Alamy as an agency? I think Arterra was in the same boat. The fog lifts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bill Brooks said:

 

Was that because you were listed on Alamy as an agency? I think Arterra was in the same boat. The fog lifts.

 

 

Nope. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

Could have been licensed hundreds of times on a micro stock before being taken down and put on Alamy as exclusive.

 

If you don't bother to first ask the contributor why should they be liable for your expenses and fees?

 

 

none of it make sense.  

 

 

(note i'll give you arrow later, system really is limiting me for last few days....  i guess agreeing with too many comments is perceived as bad by Alamy now)

Edited by meanderingemu
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Alamy locked this topic
  • Alamy unlocked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.