Taking Advantage Of Free Revisions And Misusing A Seller.

[symphonyofcello]

Hello everybody,

I have been working as a freelance instrumentalist-cellist in Fiverr for nearly one year. Recently I had a issue with a buyer which I like to present to you and learn your thoughts about. I will try my best to present the story unbiased and short but as complete as possible.

I have successfully completed more than one order with this particular buyer before and this is the latest one. It was 5:30 minutes of solo playing - recording. The requirement of the buyer was 'pretty much the same sort of tone as before'. No special requirements were presented to me in the initial discussions. Hope you-musicians should understand that this relates to the style, color, articulation, type of bowing, etc. The buyer has never presented with sheet music and all he had was dummy cello tracks, which I needed to learn by ear and record, therefore no clear picture of articulation. All the previous orders were recorded with a mixture of bowings and articulations assumed by myself, and the buyer was happy with what I recorded except for just a couple bars once which I revised without a dispute or hesitation to make the order complete.

Therefore I proceeded with this latest order in the same way particularly with the same sort of combination of articulations and I made my first delivery. 
But after the delivery the buyer changes his requirements and requested a revision with all the notes of the entire music separately articulated - detached.

This means I have to record everything again from the beginning to the end, which makes all my hard work, time, effort and creative contribution wasted that has been put in to the complete first delivery. And the buyer thoroughly insists upon the revision without exception.

I believe a revision is intended only if the seller's work doesn't meet the initial requirements of the buyer.

To put this forward in a more comprehensible example:
Say a buyer orders from an painter to draw a portrait of him, whereas he previously has had two multi-colored portraits successfully completed from the same painter. He needs the third one to be in the same style. The painter completes and delivers the portrait in the same way. After seeing the painting the buyer says I want this to be painted in black and white, not multicolored. So that is not about changing a line or a shade of the existing work, but drawing a brand new portrait right from the beginning. And the buyer expects this additional work for free of charge (in a situation where revisions are for free). And to anticipate further, what if the buyer says 'no, I want it in red and green' once he receives the second delivery of the portrait? And therefore the buyer would get three completed paintings or three versions of his portrait for the same price of a single portrait. And this can go on and on until the number of free revisions are over. Obviously the content of the order is the same - just a portrait, but in reality multiple new versions of it on their own.

1) Would you think this situation is fair? 
2) Is that how Fiverr works, or should work?
3) Then when do you think a revision should expected to be requested, to what extent and how would you think a revision should work?

I personally believe a particular order should proceed with the same basic requirements, and if those basics need to be changed that is subject to a new order with new requirements or at least extra work.

In a seller's point of view I see this clearly as an exploitation-misuse of an artist. And no need to say most sellers including me are always ready to help the buyer to achieve their initial requirements with free revisions, if our delivered work needs more quality, clarity, expressions, etc. or simply if it doesn't meet their initial requirements. But not another complete new version of the already completed work as I believe. This might relate even to paid revisions.

I would really like to learn your thoughts about this matter.
Thank you very much!

[vickieito]

5 minutes ago, symphonyofcello said:

I would really like to learn your thoughts about this matter.
Thank you very much!

Hi @symphonyofcello, just tell your buyer that what he is requesting falls outside of the scope of the order, so it can't be addressed with a revision request. However, let the buyer know that you would be more than happy to take care of his request for $XXX.

[symphonyofcello]

I guess the work is within the scope of gig, but the issue here is slightly different. Buyer claims his rights for free additional work. The actual issue is not with the money though.

[imagination7413]

I think the issue is that 'revision' isn't clearly defined. The Buyer thinks a rerecording should count as a revision. 

On 8/6/2023 at 1:42 PM, symphonyofcello said:

I guess the work is within the scope of gig, 

From what you've written, no, the work is not inside the scope of the original order. You said in the first post: "The requirement of the buyer was 'pretty much the same sort of tone as before'." If the tone has changed, then the scope has changed. (Aside from clarifying the definition of 'revision', then the other problem I see is that the scope wasn't particularly well-defined.)

If a painter is hired to paint a house, then another, then another, and they have all been painted blue, then the tenth house painted the contracted suddenly says, 'that one was suppose to be green', the scope has changed. It doesn't matter that the work flow is identical.