Infringement

[tarsierspectral]

Hi,

 

Last November I found my image used in a magazine. It was credited to me and Alamy. I didn't see it in my sales report so I alerted Alamy Infringements. They wrote to me that the Monthly has 3 months to declare the use and to contact the Infringement team in January if I don't see the sale in my sales report. Well, I'm now emailing them every month and each month I get excuses for why I haven't received the payment. They are either in a form of "you should see the payment soon" or "this customer has a different billing method" or  "we are chasing this for you". It's been 9 months since the photo was used. What action can I take myself since Alamy is not being effective?

[geogphotos]

44 minutes ago, tarsierspectral said:

Hi,

 

Last November I found my image used in a magazine. It was credited to me and Alamy. I didn't see it in my sales report so I alerted Alamy Infringements. They wrote to me that the Monthly has 3 months to declare the use and to contact the Infringement team in January if I don't see the sale in my sales report. Well, I'm now emailing them every month and each month I get excuses for why I haven't received the payment. They are either in a form of "you should see the payment soon" or "this customer has a different billing method" or  "we are chasing this for you". It's been 9 months since the photo was used. What action can I take myself since Alamy is not being effective?

 

My understanding is that you can't take any action without Alamy giving you permission. It is in our contract. 

 

Presumably this is an established Alamy client. If so this wouldn't be a copyright infringement but a problem over getting them to pay. 

 

It must be very frustrating for you.

Edited August 2 by geogphotos

[Michael Ventura]

I don't have a good answer but don't give up, keep pursuing!  

[IKuzmin]

1 hour ago, tarsierspectral said:

Well, I'm now emailing them every month and each month I get excuses for why I haven't received the payment. They are either in a form of "you should see the payment soon" or "this customer has a different billing method" or  "we are chasing this for you". It's been 9 months since the photo was used. What action can I take myself since Alamy is not being effective?

I gave up on them. A couple of years ago I reported a similar situation to Alamy, on several images published 5-6 months ago. Alamy paid me some good $$, but after another month a half of these were refunded, and the images "re-sold" for some little money. To my inquiry Alamy responded that the customer had computer problems therefore could not timely report the usage, and the infringement reporting was wrong. Since that I did not get any infringement payments from Alamy. Guess my images are not stolen? But I did see some of them published months ago w/o payments and not showing up in my sale reports, I just do not bother asking Alamy anymore.

[Avpics]

It took me nine months* of continuous chasing to get a back page of the Daily Mirror news image reported. Prior to that and after around six months* of chasing for an image in the Star I approached the publication direct which resolved the issue but won me a slapped wrist from Alamy. Various reasons given but there is no excuse for these delays given the evidence of provided tear-offs.

 

* - beyond the four months allowed delay.

[tarsierspectral]

Yes, it's very frustrating. Infringement team doesn't even respond, I have to go through member services to get any answer.

[Betty LaRue]

For the most part, other than a few who have reported money collected, I think the infringement collection idea is mostly a failure. Great idea, just probably too few boots on the floor & a lack of toughness.

[Nick Hatton]

No complaints here, had two infringements this week $540 and $125, a National British magazine used 4 of my images in February but only reported two of them, one of the unreported was the front cover hence one large payment, 

[gvallee]

No complaint here either. I had a couple of welcome payments for my not so in demand portfolio. It's always a nice surprise.

 

[NYCat]

I have also had a couple with a good payment. I hadn't done a thing to report them. It was all Alamy.

 

Paulette

[Betty LaRue]

Good to hear that. So if it’s reported in our small circle, there are many more contributors having success not on this forum.

[Marianne]

Took me a year to get a $250 infringement I’d reported from a book publisher. The $250 showed up then it changed to $75 then both refunded but finally got the full amount. I kept sending emails to Alamy. It was an image exclusively with Alamy.  
 

Frustrating I know but don’t give up.  I fear that Alamy isn’t known for their follow up so I fear their clients take advantage of their restraint. 

[Rubens Alarcon]

I just got one for $68.40. Possibly a web use I reported twice (June/2021, and April/2022), but I'm still waiting for confirmation. It is a welcome addition to a terribly slow month of August.

[Jeffrey Isaac Greenberg]

after reading these horror stories

I'm not going to imply dismissing
them by saying, "I got mine..."
are there English laws protecting English freelancers...?

[Phil]

On 03/08/2024 at 16:00, Marianne said:

I fear that Alamy isn’t known for their follow up so I fear their clients take advantage of their restraint. 

 

Given the frequent reports of this abuse from the small number of Alamy contributors that frequent this forum - consider how widespread the problem must be across the entire contributor population.  The existence of an Alamy "Infringement Team" is evidence of the scope of the issue.

 

Payment should be made when media is downloaded to greatly reduce infringements.   The anachronistic sales self-reporting and payment scheme would appear to be ripe for infringement and other abuse and a drain on Alamy's and their contributor's revenues.

 

Edited August 22 by Phil

[BidC]

20 hours ago, Phil said:

 

Given the frequent reports of this abuse from the small number of Alamy contributors that frequent this forum - consider how widespread the problem must be across the entire contributor population.  The existence of an Alamy "Infringement Team" is evidence of the scope of the issue.

 

Payment should be made when media is downloaded to greatly reduce infringements.   The anachronistic sales-self reporting and payment scheme would appear to be ripe for infringement and other abuse and a drain on Alamy's and their contributor's revenues.

 

 

Yep - I've had three this month, two from live news (with the fourth in a set of two being paid for ie just one paid for), that have been used without a record appearing in sales. The one licensed overseas I can understand as they take longer to register and pay, but the other two from live news both unpaid, or recorded, (with a twin which was paid for) seems odd. I'm guessing live news works differently these days. The prices certainly do ! But 3x 0.60p does buy me half a cup of tea (!) 😎

Edited August 23 by BidC

[M.Chapman]

3 hours ago, Phil said:

Payment should be made when media is downloaded to greatly reduce infringements.

That would be great, but then I suspect we'd have to accept MicroStock pricing....

Some customers like the "download now, declare if used later" model so they can download images and mockup articles and they don't have to pay anything if the article is never published.

 

Mark

[zxzoomy]

My education came years ago with a different agency when my photos were used by 3 national UK newspapers on the same day. Two of the three needed chasing (successfully) a year later. When those papers moralise I remember that. The Guardian was the one that paid on time.  

[spacecadet]

12 hours ago, zxzoomy said:

The Guardian was the one that paid on time.  

You'll have noticed that it still does. End of the following month. But then it has much less to pay than it did a few years ago.

My first ever licence was in the Guardian, 2009, $44. Most recent, $5. Same usage, except it's now perpetual.

Edited August 23 by spacecadet