Stock photos

I've had the idea of selling my photos on stock photo sites suggested by a number of people and it kind of sounds like a good fit at first. I love taking pictures of nature, getting outside and shooting street photography, and of course just photographing generic everyday items. You never know what sort of need there might be for those types of images right? There is a market for those things but many of the popular outlets seem to throw the photographers under the bus, highly undervaluing the work and effectively running themselves and others into the ground.
For this reason I think having my own private stock portfolio is probably going to be the best way to go, perhaps networked with several other photographers in a co-op of sorts. There would be a few primary differences between this setup and microstock companies like Corbis and Getty that would hopefully be closer in model to the original structure and pricing of stock images. There would be tighter control on the use of an image. Lets say perhaps that once a photo is licensed for a business's website or promotional brochure, it won't be used for anything other than portfolio or personal use by me.

I came across the following blog that illustrates an issue that comes up with microstock thanks to another blog I was reading and it really is ridiculous. I know that when I see a generic photo representing a company my alarm bells go off. I want to see an authentic representation of the business I'm looking into and if they're willing to gloss over the reality of their setup, who knows what other corners they've cut and how that will come back to bite someone. I can't imagine I'm alone in that perception.