Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

how much will alamy be deducting for mistaken infringement chases, will it be their actual costs or will it be higher for their profit, will they provide details on how fee was determined, what if the chased image has another agencies credit line and alamy knows right then to stop chasing, will they check image status on the day of chasing so that only exclusive images are chased that day even if that image was non exclusive 24 hours earlier, other agencies can misreport selections going years back and it can be impossible to verify correct reports what is alamy going to charge for each mistake $1000 $500 $200 $10 can alamy tell us ahead of 24 july i am asking here for others to find out and hoping PAlamy answers, i think i may have to sacrifice a lot of money and just make everything non exclusive if i don't get clarity on this,

Edited by FocusUno
due to common sense
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

as per the official thread Alamy has now requested these questions be directed directly by e-mail to contributors@alamy.com  if you can't find the answer in the thread below (i can't say i remember them ever answering with specifics) .  Note that they have been locking any new posts related to the contract, this is why i'm posting this. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Robert M Estall said:

I note you have been registered with Alamy since March 2004 so 16 years, and have a portfolio of 10 images

 

As Joan Armatrading once remarked:

Awe Rosie, don't you do that to the boys..

😂😂

 

wim

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Robert M Estall said:

I note you have been registered with Alamy since March 2004 so 16 years, and have a portfolio of 10 images

 

Still, we have to be super-impressed that she'd "sacrifice a lot of money" if she made these ten images non-exclusive!

She could give underachievers like me tutorials to make up the difference. 😉

Edited by Cryptoprocta
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I recognise that pseudo. I know who you are Señor FocusUno 10 images. 

Edited by MDM
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's only one way to find out: just try it.

So I just filed a report for an Unauthorized Use.

I have used the regular form, assuming that it is still the way to do it.

It's about an image that was clearly lifted from the Alamy website and has it's watermarks clearly visible. It has been in use throughout this website since at least December 2018 and the last screenshot was send to me by a fellow Alamy contributor and former forum regular the day before yesterday.

 

I haven't filed a report for a long while, because it seemed like a lot of work for very little benefit. Both for me and Alamy staff. (Whom I still owe at least some cake for their effort 😁)

 

3 minutes ago, MDM said:

I recognise that pseudo. I know who you are Señor FocusUno 10 images. 

Ah did Joan Armatrading help?

10 images: Ha!

😂

 

wim

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, wiskerke said:

 

 

 

Ah did Joan Armatrading help?

10 images: Ha!

😂

 

wim


No just the pseudo. Rosie  Betancourt always seemed a bit incongruous for the person in question and it rang a bell. Number of images out by more than  5 orders of magnitude if I recall. 

Edited by MDM
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have asked for a lot of image checks over the last few months and cannot praise the Alamy team more highly. They do a superb job.

 

But what isn't so great is the reporting back system once potential infringements are passed on to the team that investigates. 

 

I have some from February/March and have not heard back. I did enquire a little while ago and was told rather firmly that if there was something to let me know about then they would have had let me known about it. So things are left hanging. 

 

I fully expect to change the status of all my images to non-exclusive simply so that I can continue to pursue my own cases. 

 

One of the most satisfying - and I was paid promptly without any haggling, perhaps they wanted to move on quickly - was an Office of Police and Crime Commissioner.😄

 

And no I will not divulge which one it was. 

Edited by geogphotos
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MDM said:


No just the pseudo. Rosie  Betancourt always seemed a bit incongruous for the person in question and it rang a bell. Number of images out by more than  5 orders of magnitude if I recall. 

 

Yep! Someone who dropped out of the forum at the previous cut...

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, gvallee said:

 

Yep! Someone who dropped out of the forum at the previous cut...

 

If it's the "Rosie" I'm thinking of, he had a habit of including keywords in his captions, which seems to fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

If it's the "Rosie" I'm thinking of, he had a habit of including keywords in his captions, which seems to fit.

 

Well, he had his own language didn't he? Lots of rain in Miami recently I hear...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The chasing is being done by Permission Machine on behalf of Alamy. I really can't see there being much money in it for them when images sell for so little. It usually takes around 50 hours to bring a case to court and with the uplift usually awarded between 2-6 times the normal license fee, its just not financially viable for most infringements.

I'm sure it will just be a few emails asking politely to pay up. Better to be non exclusive and do the chasing yourself if Alamy aren't going to.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 minutes ago, wilkopix said:

The chasing is being done by Permission Machine on behalf of Alamy. I really can't see there being much money in it for them when images sell for so little. It usually takes around 50 hours to bring a case to court and with the uplift usually awarded between 2-6 times the normal license fee, its just not financially viable for most infringements.

I'm sure it will just be a few emails asking politely to pay up. Better to be non exclusive and do the chasing yourself if Alamy aren't going to.

You know a business is legit when their website favicon is still the Wordpress default logo.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RyanU said:

 

You know a business is legit when their website favicon is still the Wordpress default logo.

 

 

the meet the team page is even more "legit", look of bunch of selfies used as their own pictures -i know they give photographer "credits" but if i was a portrait photographer i would probably not use this as a reference- no consistent crop,  

 

pitching your service to photographers i would think you would pay attention to those kind of details. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, gvallee said:

 

Well, he had his own language didn't he? Lots of rain in Miami recently I hear...

 

No doubt it's raining cats and kangaroos  in Miami. There's probably something to be said for having your own language these days.

 

"PALamy" -- I kinda like that. 🤠

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, wilkopix said:

The chasing is being done by Permission Machine on behalf of Alamy.

 

Is there an announcement somewhere?

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/07/2021 at 08:06, wilkopix said:

The chasing is being done by Permission Machine on behalf of Alamy. (THANKS! ONE USEFUL POST USUALLY SHOWS UP EVENTUALLY!)

on their uk homepage permission machine states "at no cost to you" so how can PAlamy rightly deduct legal fee for errant exclusive image, clearly they can deduct 20% more commission if that image was licensed on same day by PAlamy

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FocusUno said:

on their uk homepage permission machine states "at no cost to you" so how can PAlamy rightly deduct legal fee for errant exclusive image, clearly they can deduct 20% more commission if that image was licensed on same day by PAlamy

Because Alamy is giving us worse terms than PM would give an individual. No reason why they should be as favourable- after all the new contract is "take it or leave it".

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FocusUno said:

on their uk homepage permission machine states "at no cost to you" so how can PAlamy rightly deduct legal fee for errant exclusive image, clearly they can deduct 20% more commission if that image was licensed on same day by PAlamy

 

 

The fees are for legal fee Alamy may incur in a mistaken infringement case due to contributor discrepancy .  This would likely include fees for Alamy to defend themselves in case of action against them due to their wrongly accusing someone of infringement.  They are making everything no risk to them, all risk on the contributors while reducing compensation by 20% of more. 

Edited by meanderingemu
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/07/2021 at 18:06, wiskerke said:

Permission Machine, like this?

Photographic Permit Machine Permission to Photograph Stock Photo

by Geopic

 

 

As Mark said: has there been an announcement somewhere?

 

wim

Costs more than how much Alamy will end up licensing them for...

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

a reply from CR, they don't know legal fee pricing charged to contributors yet, they will get back to me when they do, if chasing service don't charge how can agency-customer charge contributor for nonexistent legal fee, i guess agency can do what it wants because contract can say what is wanted

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.