Contract Change 2021 - Official thread

[John Mitchell]

10 minutes ago, KFisher said:

 

My sentiments exactly. Alamy isn't my biggest money maker compared to the other two sites I contribute to, but it's a nice little chunk of travel money each year, doing something that I enjoy. Contributors were up in arms about the SS changes last June and left in droves (or said they did). I stuck around there too and am now doing better than before their big commission change. While it doesn't make me happy, I choose to leave my photos up and will be adding more.

 

Interesting to hear about your experiences at that other place. Do you have a big portfolio there (if you don't mind my asking)?

[KFisher]

Just now, John Mitchell said:

 

Interesting to hear about your experiences at that other place. Do you have a big portfolio there (if you don't mind my asking)?

A little over 4200 images. The first few months were miserable, but especially the last few months have seen very large numbers. It could be because I focus on travel photos which are in demand, but whatever reason - I'll take it.

 

[MDM]

38 minutes ago, Sally said:

A red arrow for this...OK I’ll shut up.

 

I've just had an email from James Allsworth asking me to clarify that Alamy are not giving people red arrows here. I have met James on a few occasions and it was a friendly email. James has offered to answer any questions I might have in relation to the new contract as well which is much appreciated. So apologies to James and Alamy for getting things wrong. It was only meant as a joke anyway.

Edited May 21, 2021 by MDM

[meanderingemu]

5 minutes ago, Sally said:

A red arrow for this...OK I’ll shut up.

 

please don't , your input is greatly appreciated by many. 

[John Mitchell]

1 minute ago, KFisher said:

A little over 4200 images. The first few months were miserable, but especially the last few months have seen very large numbers. It could be because I focus on travel photos which are in demand, but whatever reason - I'll take it.

 

 

Thanks for the reply. Best of luck.

[Robz]

3 hours ago, AndrewP said:

The word Infringement appears eleven times in the response - that seems a bit like a retail shop wanting a business model that makes more money out of shoplifters than genuine customers.

Well that is the best model for making money out of photography these days. You can sell a license for $1 to $100 if you're lucky, or you can post all your images on as many photo sharing sites as possible and regularly search for unauthorised use, and invoice them, and if they don't pay, which is actually what you want, take them to court.

 

I'm sure we've all read the stories about copyright infringement settlements. One that sticks in my mind was a photographer who found his £25 image in a large company's brochure, he asked them for around £50 (£25 for the image, £25 for not asking first), they saw he was a one-man band, said no, he took them to court and they ended up paying him £25,000.

 

I heard a similar story recently from a photographer colleague, not sure of the amount, but his image, one that any of us could have created in less then 2 mins, was widely shared in many media outlets without prior authorisation and he pursued every one. He says it was one of his most lucrative images.

And relative of mine recently got an £80,000 pay out from a copyright case (not a photo but a series of drawings).

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by Robz

[John Mitchell]

deleted by me

Edited May 21, 2021 by John Mitchell

[John Mitchell]

50 minutes ago, Bill Brooks said:

Copyright enforcement has become big business, tread with care.

 

I agree, Bill. Every action has -- or at least can have -- an equal and opposite reaction.

 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by John Mitchell

[Jill Morgan]

I doubt I will leave, but certainly will spread the images elsewhere.  Some images I will remove due to Alamy not addressing the contributor liability issue.  And every image that is not wildlife, will be marked editorial only instead of just no releases. Like John, I used to think that was enough, but now doubting it.

 

Besides if I left, couldn't hang here and get all the great info and advice that is supplied so generously here.

 

Jill

[MDM]

36 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Wasn't me. All the arrows in my quiver are green. 🌿

 

John -please see my revised post above about getting an email from James Allsworth asking me to clarify that Alamy are not giving red arrows here. Would you mind removing the quoted passage in your post from my post please. Thanks

[John Mitchell]

25 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

John -please see my revised post above about getting an email from James Allsworth asking me to clarify that Alamy are not giving red arrows here. Would you mind removing the quoted passage in your post from my post please. Thanks

 

done

[MDM]

3 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

done

 

Thanks John.  😀

[M.Chapman]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

 

I've just had an email from James Allsworth asking me to clarify that Alamy are not giving people red arrows here. I have met James on a few occasions and it was a friendly email. James has offered to answer any questions I might have in relation to the new contract as well which is much appreciated. So apologies to James and Alamy for getting things wrong. It was only meant as a joke anyway.

 

Make a joke suggestion that Alamy has posted a red arrow on the forum and you get an almost immediate response and an offer of answers to more questions.... Seems more effective than 50 pages of ranting

 

Mark

[Russell Watkins]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

 

Yes but I bet there are a lot of people who won't be leaving Alamy who won't want to be termed Remainers. Me I have no problem with it although I am not decided yet. 😆

 

What we need to help us make the decision are pithy slogans on the side of a bus.

[Betty LaRue]

6 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Wow discounts for being a mature student with OU. Now what can I sign up for?

 

Allan

 

OU= Oklahoma University. Home of the Sooners, my football team. You can sign up for the cheer squad.

[John Mitchell]

48 minutes ago, Jill Morgan said:

I doubt I will leave, but certainly will spread the images elsewhere.  Some images I will remove due to Alamy not addressing the contributor liability issue.  And every image that is not wildlife, will be marked editorial only instead of just no releases. Like John, I used to think that was enough, but now doubting it.

 

Besides if I left, couldn't hang here and get all the great info and advice that is supplied so generously here.

 

Jill

 

Glad to hear that you're staying. I'm still undecided about checking the editorial use only box. It would be helpful to get some advice about this from Alamy as I'm sure a lot of contributors are in the same boat. The micros certainly require this indication for all "editorial" images (i.e. with unreleased people and "property"). So why doesn't Alamy?

[Foreign Export]

5 hours ago, Jill Morgan said:

 

But that's not what the contract says.  So this will be changed?

 

2.10. By marking Content as Exclusive, you grant Alamy the right to chase third party infringements of the Content without Alamy having to consult you. 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.

 

Alamy will ask the user first - not ask the contributor first

[Foreign Export]

2 hours ago, M.Chapman said:

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

 

Point well made Mark

Over 95% of my images are exclusive to Alamy, but shortly none of them will be exclusive , I have already started to change them.

I will leave my portfolio here at Alamy but will be increasing significantly the number of images that I have with two other agencies, including the images that were previously exclusive to Alamy

I also agree that Alamy has made some poor decisions here

Martin

Edited May 21, 2021 by Foreign Export
typo

[Betty LaRue]

5 hours ago, AndrewP said:

I make a few direct sales to design agencies who are working for their clients so I'll need to mark any images I've licensed to them as non exclusive. I can't have a design agency getting contacted by their client and risking my relationship with them.

I’m not real sure that will save your clients from being bothered. “The Statement” said they would concentrate the most on exclusive, but nowhere did I see them state they wouldn’t chase non-exclusive.

[meanderingemu]

2 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

I’m not real sure that will save your clients from being bothered. “The Statement” said they would concentrate the most on exclusive, but nowhere did I see them state they wouldn’t chase non-exclusive.

but the contract only allows them to go direct on exclusive, so if they did it on "non exclusive" they are in breach and then we have options. 

[Sally]

The issue of flagrant misuse of exclusivity as an argument for Alamy to change commission rates seems to be a complete red herring. They say that there are 17 million images marked as exclusive out of a total of 255 million. That is approximately 6%. Those that are incorrectly marked as exclusive must be a much much smaller proportion.

 

I hope that all contributors here recognise the implications of marking images as exclusive. No benefit in terms of commission (unless you are a Platinum contributor) and giving Alamy the right to chase your clients to whom you have licensed directly without asking you first.

[Foreign Export]

2 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

but the contract only allows them to go direct on exclusive, so if they did it on "non exclusive" they are in breach and then we have options. 

 

thats correct,  the contract is clear - they will only pursue infringements on images marked as exclusive to Alamy

 

 

 

[meanderingemu]

2 hours ago, MDM said:

 

I've just had an email from James Allsworth asking me to clarify that Alamy are not giving people red arrows here. I have met James on a few occasions and it was a friendly email. James has offered to answer any questions I might have in relation to the new contract as well which is much appreciated. So apologies to James and Alamy for getting things wrong. It was only meant as a joke anyway.

 i would like to clarify that my laughing reaction is not about Alamy asking to clarify that they are not giving people red arrows here but about the original post. 

 

 

[meanderingemu]

2 minutes ago, Foreign Export said:

 

thats correct,  the contract is clear - they will only pursue infringements on images marked as exclusive to Alamy

 

 

 

but their comment implied otherwise,  so there is reasons for concerns. 

[wiskerke]

1 minute ago, Sally said:

The issue of flagrant misuse of exclusivity as an argument for Alamy to change commission rates seems to be a complete red herring. They say that there are 17 million images marked as exclusive out of a total of 255 million. That is approximately 6%. Those that are incorrectly marked as exclusive must be a much much smaller proportion.

 

I hope that all contributors here recognise the implications of marking images as exclusive. No benefit in terms of commission (unless you are a Platinum contributor) and giving Alamy the right to chase your clients to whom you have licensed directly without asking you first.

 

So it's about something else?

That would be quality then. It tells us that the quality of the images that are exclusive is just not as high as the quality of all the non-exclusives: the agencies; the micro-stockers.

 

wim