We do not have previous reports of this, but it has been forwarded to the Dev staff for clarification. Hang in there
Sorry for the delay, I just took a look and forwarded the ticket to our review staff for inspection. If required, we’ll take the necessary steps in this case. Thanks a lot for the report.
contrastblack saidI still haven’t received a reply, despite this post and several tweets to the @envato_support account. What gives?
Hey Brashell61, Thanks for your report. Support will be in touch with you shortly on that ticket.
We appreciate your patience and understanding
Exactly, the review team has asked you to make that change before assessing your request for a price change. That response was made on the 21st, but had not reached you due to the error in the email address. It is not related to the ticket regarding the rating.
We will be taking care of the rating issue shortly.
Not at all, the reply is the correct one, but the review staff asked to make some changes before reviewing the price. I just sent you that answer.
Do you have the ticket ID for the initial request you made about the rating? I can only see the one from today.
I just checked, and it seems that for the price revision ticket (DNR-792-84826), the email address was written wrong when creating the ticket (it says gmail.comm) and thus it bounced. I’ve gone ahead and re-sent our reply (dated April 21st) to the correct email.
Regarding the rating, I’m only able to see a ticket opened today (EHE-864-99573). Do you have the ID for that previous request so I can try to search for it and see the status?
Hey hey khuongkd!
It just seems to be just a security check issue. We’ll contact you shortly shortly. Hang in there
The problem with Nenad’s case is, that the item has been disabled for over 24 hours, but he hasn’t been contacted yet about the reason, although you say here that items only get disabled when the malfunction is already confirmed. Instead of that, he got a message that the review team will check it in the next FEW DAYS. So it doesn’t seem to be that the malfunction has been confirmed before the item got disabled.
That’s a good point, the thing is that ,as Christian said, there is more than one reason to disable an item. When we remove one, and let the author know that we disabled the item and are checking it, it is because an issue has been already detected, but requires further assessment, and that it usually takes 1-2 days to check that (although it can take more or less time depending on the situation, each case is different). This usually happens with Copyright related tickets, but can also happen with malfunctions/misleading content that needs to get a deeper look before allowing it to return to the marketplace.
fillerspace saidHey Bryan!
a reviewer will do a thorough QA and then the item will be soft-disabled if warranted. Do you actually contact the author at any point during that process? If not, that could be the problem. A customer complains on May 1st. The reviewer completes the QA process on May 15th, and the item is soft disabled. Had you contacted the author on May 1st to notify him that a complaint was received and the QA process would begin, he might be able to identify and fix the bug faster than the reviewer could verify it. He could then update the item, and the soft-disable would not be necessary.
That’s an interesting point. Under the current process we’d only contact an Author when the item has actually been soft disabled. I’m not sure too many Authors would appreciate us contacting them each time a customer raised an issue with their item, as most of the time we aren’t able to replicate the issues.
here is your error right here!
if the buyer request is genuine THEN contact the author BEFORE disable the item.why is difficult to understand? really people did I miss something here? maybe is me
I’d love to clarify! And hey community!
The thing is that if we have confirmed an item as malfunctioning or misleading, and decide to contact the author (instead of disabling it), then, potential new customers will be buying a product that we know is not 100% working or as described, which is not legal. That is the main reason right there, to continue to sell an item we know to have certain issues, as we can not expect customers to purchase something and wait for an update.
I, of course, understand the point on losing potential business, but if an issue is confirmed by our staff, as an author, do you really want more customers purchasing the item (and potentially getting upset over it) if it has a known problem?
This is certainly an interesting case though.
I’d love to clarify, below you will find my answer for each of the inquiries:
1) In case we mix photos together and basically use parts of the original photo/graphic, is there any limitation related to the usage of those images for cover artworks and selling a product that uses these images?
- answer: you are welcome to mix the photos together as you see fit, with the understanding that if there is a model present, it should not be implied that the model endorses the activity/product or is put in a bad light. This is an extract from our FAQ section:There are some restrictions. Even if images of people are model released, footage or photos with images of people can’t be used in a way that implies the model is personally endorsing something. They also cannot be used for sensitive subjects. Sensitive subjects are those that could be offensive or highly unflattering to the model or put them in a bad light (using a reasonable standard), such as medical and health issues, sexual activity, pornography (adult content), substance abuse, tobacco use, or immoral or illegal activity.
As it will be cover art for a track being sold, you will need an extended license per photo.
2) Is there any legal difference to such situation in case we are using a photo/graphic unchanged – just the way it is as a cover artwork.
- answer: the item/photo can not be used unchanged as it could be extracted by the customers. As an example, if the photo is used ‘as is’, without modifications or overlapping elements, a customer/person cut potentially crop the original image and use it, which is not allowed.
3) Do we need to mention the source (artist/photodune) anywhere near the cover? - answer: no mention to PhotoDune or the author is needed.
Hope this helps.
Hey community! I just talked to the devs, and things with the API should be returning back to normal. Sorry once more for the inconveniences.
Will it require use of user agent or not? That is what is important, because it would require massive updates to change the existing API related code to do it. Can we get some detailed information on this subject and what to expect and will there be any change to the way API is accessed?Milan
It should work without any alteration (no need to add user agents)! We are monitoring the situation and will communicate in case any change is required!