Infringement information

[geogphotos]

It is welcome to see an Additional Fee reported of $36.99. When I download the information I can see that this has come from an Infringement.

 

What I don't know is which image this relates to. let alone which user it is.

 

Is it one that I have reported or one that I don't know about?

 

This is essential information for me to monitor and track my pursuit of copyright infringements.

 

Could you please routinely supply this information? Thanks 

 

 

[Ognyan Yosifov]

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

It is welcome to see an Additional Fee reported of $36.99. When I download the information I can see that this has come from an Infringement.

 

What I don't know is which image this relates to. let alone which user it is.

 

Is it one that I have reported or one that I don't know about?

 

This is essential information for me to monitor and track my pursuit of copyright infringements.

 

Could you please routinely supply this information? Thanks 

 

 

When downloading the information there are some digits and letters as a case code or something, and I can see the photo ID as well... In my case it's a previously sold photo, but there's no infringer's info

[wiskerke]

7 hours ago, geogphotos said:

It is welcome to see an Additional Fee reported of $36.99. When I download the information I can see that this has come from an Infringement.

 

What I don't know is which image this relates to. let alone which user it is.

 

Is it one that I have reported or one that I don't know about?

 

This is essential information for me to monitor and track my pursuit of copyright infringements.

 

Could you please routinely supply this information? Thanks 

 

 

That is weird. When I download today's Net revenue sales report, I get: Infringement revenue- AMY-2022-04-0082 - F9FHYR.

F9FHYR being the image. Mid $$ btw.

 

wim

[geogphotos]

Okay, thanks. I now see it: 

 

AMY-2022-03-1077 - M1X3E9

[geogphotos]

What does AMY-2022-03-1077 tell me?

 

This is an image marked as non-exclusive. I do not recall reporting this to Alamy.

[geogphotos]

The problems with this situation:

 

1) this is a non-exclusive image so I should have been informed before Alamy pursued - it could have been via another agency

2) low fee of $36.99 - is this a sweetheart deal? Much lower than I would expect from through a copyright agency

 

A general observation/complaint is that:

 

1)I am contractually bound to check with Alamy before pursuing my own cases of copyright infringement - which I do, I need to check with all agencies

2) but on at least one occasion having done so Alamy has, instead of simply supplying the information, just taken on the case even though I specifically stated that I wanted to pursue it myself ( non-exclusive image). 

 

The contract does not seem to operate both ways or be consistently applied.

[geogphotos]

 I forgot to add a very important detail.

 

I have signed territory exclusive contracts with two infringement companies. Alamy pursuing cases without my knowledge places me in a difficult situation especially as Alamy will not reveal any details of who the infringer is.