Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It's Sun day, with sales coming in from that esteemed publication. 

Has anyone else had some multiple sales of images last month, followed by refunds two days ago, followed by the same images selling again today? 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just about to send CR an email about this.

 

Two licenses I presume were for the Sun of the same image. My photo spotted in the Sun twice - last fall and earlier this year. Two refunds for those images came in this week.

 

fD

Edited by fotoDogue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a double sale last month and assumed it was because the image was in The Sun and the Scottish Sun.

 

One was refunded few days ago, so that's that theory blown out of the water.

 

Bl00dy horrible rag!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same (weather news) image sold twice at the end of Feb on the same day. Upon checking via Google I found it had been used in the Sun online and something called 'UK Headlines' - I don't know what the latter is but it appeared to have the same layout / photos as the Sun article. Anyway yesterday I noticed that one of the two sales had been refunded. I can only presume that the UK Headlines thing is something to do with the Sun and they're classing it as the same publication even though it has two distinct web links - seems a bit odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same (weather news) image sold twice at the end of Feb on the same day. Upon checking via Google I found it had been used in the Sun online and something called 'UK Headlines' - I don't know what the latter is but it appeared to have the same layout / photos as the Sun article. Anyway yesterday I noticed that one of the two sales had been refunded. I can only presume that the UK Headlines thing is something to do with the Sun and they're classing it as the same publication even though it has two distinct web links - seems a bit odd.

ukheadlines is a foreign aggregator. It's nothing to do with the Sun. That use is an infringement but since it's based somewhere like Indonesia pursuing it is a waste of time.

Sun and Scottish Sun is a single licence.

Edited by spacecadet
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks spacecadet, I didn't realise that. I don't know why there were two original sales then.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they self-billed for the two editions separately in error. I found mine in the Scottish edition as well but it was only billed once.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also wondered about the Scottish Sun - the license says "One use in a single editorial article used within the print and digital versions of a single publication."

That would suggest two payment expected. I know one of those that came through today was used in both, in different articles, so I'm looking forward to the second report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've taken "publication" to include the Scottish edition. I haven't had two payments and i think I know the answer MS will give if I ask the question. After you?

Edited by spacecadet
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've taken "publication" to include the Scottish edition. I haven't had two payments and i think I know the answer MS will give if I ask the question. After you?

I can just see that might (might) be justified if it's just the same article printed in both, but in one case the article was different, though on the same subject. We'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had two more sales come through, of images that also sold last month. Waiting to see if any 'readjustments' happen this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just had a much bigger sale register today on the same image that was a double sale and then a refund. No details as yet, but I suspect it may be an infringement I found at the same time as the Sun sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a response from Corin in CR early this morning. In my case he said the image was downloaded multiple times, including three times in one day, and the refunds are for the unpublished downloads.

In all honesty, this is one of my best sellers and it's difficult to sort out this particular client from others who have downloaded the same image. I'm also finding the new format, with refunds appearing at the top, rather confusing.

 

fD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a response from Corin in CR early this morning. In my case he said the image was downloaded multiple times, including three times in one day, and the refunds are for the unpublished downloads.

In all honesty, this is one of my best sellers and it's difficult to sort out this particular client from others who have downloaded the same image. I'm also finding the new format, with refunds appearing at the top, rather confusing.

 

fD

 

I think the refunds have always appeared at the top if the original sale was for a previous licensing period i.e. month or year.  If you click on 2 months instead on 1 month then the refund should be under the original sale.

 

Pearl

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I received a response from Corin in CR early this morning. In my case he said the image was downloaded multiple times, including three times in one day, and the refunds are for the unpublished downloads.

In all honesty, this is one of my best sellers and it's difficult to sort out this particular client from others who have downloaded the same image. I'm also finding the new format, with refunds appearing at the top, rather confusing.

 

fD

 

I think the refunds have always appeared at the top if the original sale was for a previous licensing period i.e. month or year.  If you click on 2 months instead on 1 month then the refund should be under the original sale.

 

Pearl

 

 

Right now when I go to Sales History I get three refunds at the top of the page. (23 March 2017) (28 March 2017) (27 March 2017) in that order.

When I change that to two months I get two refunds (14 February 2017) and (23 March 2017) in that order. Further down the page I have another one (28 March 2017).

If the top is a summary it doesn't seem to be in chronological order. Maybe I need to pull out my calculator and do the math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Net Revenue, refunds are reported in the order they have been recorded. (Set to Date of invoice.)
In Summary of items sold, refunds are reported following the original sale.
So if you set your Summary for a long enough period (1 Month; 2 Months; 1 Year or All) all your refunds will be paired with the original sales.

wim

edit: stupid mistake (thanks vpics!)
edit 2: where did all that code come from?

edit 3: where are my links?

Edited by wiskerke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pseudonym summary?

 

Oops: Summary of items sold of course.

Thank you!

 

wim

Share this post


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.