iStock exclusive account selling images elsewhere under different accounts.

iStock exclusive � ""StockFinland": http://www.istockphoto.com/il/photo/brain-and-diagram-front-of-black-blackboard-gm493785092-76930129
Shutterstock � "ScandinavianStock": https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/graph-concept-businessman-holding-brain-hand-349247306

iStock exclusive � ""StockFinland": http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/text-concept-on-blackboard-with-businessman-gm526845062-92685799
Fotolia � "ScandinavianStock": https://www.fotolia.com/id/127660129

Might have a special deal.

Different photos, different author's name.
I don't see where is the problem.

Same "exclusive" author selling RF images at another agency. I can see very well where the problem is.

iStock exclusive � ""StockFinland": http://www.istockphoto.com/il/photo/businessman-flying-gm646520882-117271835
Shutterstock � "ScandinavianStock": https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/blank-blackboard-businessman-wooden-aeroplane-583645756
iStock � "NorthernStock": http://www.istockphoto.com/il/photo/discover-text-with-businessman-and-wooden-aeroplane-gm636457078-112920357

Here we have similar photos, obviously shot in the same conditions, same model, same scenography, etc.
These photos are published on different sites under different names, but the same photo is never published on different sites and none of the �authors� have published the same images published by the others.

Here we can have two kind of situations:

1) The photographer can be the same and publish under different names on different sites (but don�t publish the same images)

2) But they also could be different photographers (husband and wife, mother and son, friends, etc.) using the same studio with the same scenography and the same equipment.

So, even if it could seem obvious that the photographer is the same, but as in fact we don�t know it, we cannot speak about any infringement of the iStock exclusivity, till we have not an evidence that the same photographer did all the photos.

I don�t know how it works at you, but at me it exists something called the presumption of innocence, and I think that it is very fair to not consider somebody, anybody, guilty until you have no indisputable evidences of his guilt.

My caretaker and I stood side by side for 7 years and shot exactly the same thing. I was exclusive with istock. He was not. I made 5x more money than him a month and still do even though we don't shoot together anymore. Our content looked exactly alike because he had to stand by me so I didn't fall. Point being, you can shoot with someone that is non exclusive and their images will look the same. Just like at a Lypse.

My caretaker and I stood side by side for 7 years and shot exactly the same thing. I was exclusive with istock. He was not. I made 5x more money than him a month and still do even though we don't shoot together anymore. Our content looked exactly alike because he had to stand by me so I didn't fall. Point being, you can shoot with someone that is non exclusive and their images will look the same. Just like at a Lypse.

Notwithstading your personal circumstances, Jodie, you must admit that from the buyer's pov, it makes their claim of "Signature: Our very best images and video clips � and you can�t get them from anyone else" pretty farcical.
I doubt if there are many exclusives who would claim that their images are better than all of those from indies.

Officially 'lypses used to be for exclusives only, unofficial 'lypses could be attended by indies, but they had to submit all their 'lypse images only to iStock. In fact, on one lypse (maybe Japan, maybe another held around the same time) they said that all images taken on the trip, even if you stayed on a few extra days, had to be submitted only to iStock (don't know how they were going to police that, e.g. re locals).

I didn't know that had changed. They really are fooling the buyers.
Getty has long been in the 'alternative facts' brigade.

Wouldn't brag about what Sean,
There for the grace of G-d go I.  You could walk in my shoes one day. At any moment your life can change in a second like mine did. So don't be so righteous Superman! Actually yours did change in a moment, but only moneterally because of your cockyness and own wrongdoingins.
I still need someone to shoot with me but now I am on meds that keep me from fainting when I bend down.

As for Lypses, I agree, they should be for exclusives because IS can't keep track of the pictures taken outside of the Lypse

I don't think any infringer actually is daft enough to use the same user name!!
Either this is an exclusive selling different pics from the same shoot elsewhere, with or without a 'deal'...