Does Alamy make up these licenses as they go?

[Slartybartfast]

I have had dire sales lately so thought I would try to find any usages online that have not been accounted for (from past experience I know these are neglected).  I found a couple and reported one in particular to Alamy.

To Alamy`s credit they did put it through very quickly. The image in question had been used originally in January and the same newspaper used it again in June, but had not reported it. However I was very disappointed with the pathetic amount I got compared to the original use. Then I noticed the licence as below.

 

Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, any editorial digital use, one time use only, Discounted re-use
Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
Start: 18 September 2014
End: 18 September 2016

 

Given that the publisher did not report the usage (Unless Alamy are failing to pass on sales) why should they get a discount! If they cannot report a use within 3 months surely they should have to pay more for failure, not get a discount. That discount was significant too, paying only 28% of the original usage fee.

 

Is it not time that this situation was ended, I do not want to be continually searching for unreported sales. As far as I am concerned failure to report a sale amounts to theft, after all you could not possibly find all possible uses, online or offline. So when these multinational conglomerates like the media group concerned here fails to report sales they should be charged more, not less, as a deterrent.

[Martin P Wilson]

I ould not agree more!

[John Mitchell]

A few years ago, I used to get a lot of "spot use" (yeah, right) sales in Eastern Europe, the Russian Fed, etc. Those seem to have dried up completely. So perhaps Alamy is clamping down in that department at least, although some of those leases were through distributors.

[Slartybartfast]

I didn`t  bother chasing up the last "spot use"  in eastern europe that I had, but  I too have not had any for year or so.

[wiskerke]

Most spot uses that I have found back then (and reported in the image found threads) were really just that: spot uses. Especially Vogue and some other glossies like that sometimes used 10 or more tiny images on a page to illustrate a fashion trend or the daily life of a starlet.

 

Maybe page design changed or the editor chose an even cheaper image outlet. Or, more likely, some big agency carrying a particularly big stick, rewrote their contract and made them an offer they could not refuse.

 

wim

[KWheal]

I have moaned about this on several occasions to alamy but to no avail. How can a company who fail to declare usages continue to get discounts? I have asked the question to be included in ask james videos but it has never been used in the video.

The reason I believe is that alamy get their flat rate fee per month from the newspapers in the scheme so it does not matter whether the newspapers correctly report or not, alamy still get their money. I think alamy is a great company to have my images with but their attitude to the newspapers lets it down.

I know some people say "if you do not like it then do not be in the newspaper scheme". I still get some good sales from newspapers in the scheme so why should I pull out because of the attitude of a couple of publications (we all know who they are).

 

An example was that a certain publication used an image online at the time when they paid $80 per image. I then found it a few years later. Reported it to alamy and I got paid the current rate , $6. So by non reporting the newspaper saved £74. I go through all my images about once every 3 months and every time I can guarantee that I will find images non reported by two of the dailies.

If that's the same across all contributors then that's a hell of a lot of images not reported

kevin

[AlbertSnapper]

Self reporting image use - it's a bit like people who put their own home grown fruit 'n' veg on a table at the end of the driveway, with an honesty box alongside the produce. Some will pay what is requested, others will pay (so they don't feel guilty) but not the full amount, and others just take knowing the consequences if caught won't amount to much.