pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Comparison of Standard RF License Agreements  (Read 32386 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

grafix04

« on: June 05, 2012, 04:08 »
+4
I've copied this over from this thread where I created a table comparing the standard RF licenses of a few of our agents.  If you'd like another agent added, find any errors or find changes to existing licenses at a later date, drop me a post here and I'll update it.

ETA:  The purpose of this table is to highlight those agents selling EL User Rights under the normal standard RF license and subscription sales.


AgentOther ReproductionsPrint ReproductionsSeatsResolution (pixels)
Shutterstock
250,000
250,000
Single
800 x 600
iStockphoto
500,000 *1
500,000 *1
Single
1200 x 800
Fotolia
Unlimited
Unlimited
Unlimited
1000 x 1000
Dreamstime
Unlimited
500,000
Single
800 width
DepositPhotos
500,000
500,000
Single
1024 x 678
123rf
250,000
250,000
Single? *2
No restrictions
Bigstock
Unlimited but *3
Unlimited but *3
Single
1200 x 800
Canstock
500,000
500,000
Single
600 x 800
Veer
500,000
500,000
Single
800 x 600
Stockfresh
Unlimited
250,000
Single
800 x 600
GLStockImages
10,000
10,000
Unlimited
No restrictions

* Notes
1. Excess Reproduction Run for iStockphoto is invoiced to buyer - does this mean no additional commission is paid to the contributor?
2. Number of seats is not mentioned in the standard licence restrictions for 123rf, however they do over an unlimited multi-seat EL.
3. Limited reproduction however usage granted to only one type and must purchase separate license for each type.

Other reproductions include anything that's not reproduced on printed material.  For example, ebooks, images incorporated into software, media reproductions - film, video, email marketing and similar.

I've highlighted the ones that need attention in red.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2012, 09:36 by grafix04 »


« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2012, 05:17 »
0
I've just made this thread sticky so it's easy to reference back to in the future.

grafix04

« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2012, 05:39 »
0
Thanks Leaf.

« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2012, 06:26 »
0
Thanks for undertaking this!  Great to see laid out this way.  Would be helpful to see if EL can be purchased for a subscription price.  Would also love to see the minimum publicly noted potential price for an EL.

I recall that PhotoDune has low priced ELs which is why I've been avoiding them.  Or am I confusing them with somebody else?
« Last Edit: June 05, 2012, 06:38 by Sadstock »

« Reply #4 on: June 05, 2012, 06:32 »
0
I don't see the sense of "web reproductions", is this the same a "hits on page", in which case how is anyone going to police it? Or does it mean they can make 250,000=500,000 different web pages with the image in it, which is never going to happen, anyway?

grafix04

« Reply #5 on: June 05, 2012, 07:39 »
0
Thanks for undertaking this!  Great to see laid out this way.  Would be helpful to see if EL can be purchased for a subscription price.  Would also love to see the minimum publicly noted potential price for an EL.

I recall that PhotoDune has low priced ELs which is why I've been avoiding them.  Or am I confusing them with somebody else?

I think you're right about PD.  I didn't join them for a good reason and that was probably it.

I wouldn't mind comparing EL prices too but I think that will have to be a new project on another table. It's difficult to compare agents as they all have different ELs, different sizing and now we've got sites like 123rf who offer different pricing depending which country the buyer lives at.

grafix04

« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2012, 07:41 »
0
I don't see the sense of "web reproductions", is this the same a "hits on page", in which case how is anyone going to police it? Or does it mean they can make 250,000=500,000 different web pages with the image in it, which is never going to happen, anyway?

Thanks BT.  I wasn't sure what to call it at the time but I changed the heading to 'Other Reproductions' and added a note under the table.

« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2012, 08:35 »
0
I was talking about this problem more than year ago, but no one paid much attention to ...
Maybe because I was to lazy to make a table like this...
Thank you Leaf and Lee also!
« Last Edit: June 05, 2012, 08:42 by borg »

« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2012, 08:36 »
0
Double post

« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2012, 08:51 »
0
Great thread! Very useful.

Please add Alamy to the list and if possible add the EL payouts (or the range).

ELs can be disabled at Photodune - also something that might be interesting to add, which agency offers opt-out for ELs.

Thanks for the hard work!

grafix04

« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2012, 09:19 »
0
I was talking about this problem more than year ago, but no one paid much attention to ...
Maybe because I was to lazy to make a table like this...
Thank you Leaf and Lee also!

I'm not Lee.  I suppose I'm anonymous so I could be, but I'm not.  Maybe ;)

But yes, thanks to Lee for raising it on his site.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2012, 09:23 »
0
I think you should insert some red on CanStockPhoto because Jane and I had a discussion with Duncan over POD's and they do allow POD's unless you opt out of it.

grafix04

« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2012, 09:31 »
0
Great thread! Very useful.

Please add Alamy to the list and if possible add the EL payouts (or the range).

ELs can be disabled at Photodune - also something that might be interesting to add, which agency offers opt-out for ELs.

Thanks for the hard work!

Hi Click,

I didn't add Alamy because as I understand it, they only offer one license which is an EL.  The point of this table is to highlight the agencies that sell under their standard RF license what normally would be sold under EL terms.  This way we can see where we're are being jipped.  Fotolia for example is allowing unlimited runs on the standard license so buyers can purchase what would normally be sold as an EL on other sites for.  In other words, we are selling ELs at Fotolia (under the standard license) for pennies.  Even worse, the standard license applies to subscription sales so we're selling ELs just for a few cents.

« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2012, 09:32 »
0
I was talking about this problem more than year ago, but no one paid much attention to ...
Maybe because I was to lazy to make a table like this...
Thank you Leaf and Lee also!

I'm not Lee.  I suppose I'm anonymous so I could be, but I'm not.  Maybe ;)

But yes, thanks to Lee for raising it on his site.

Ouch! Sorry Grafix!  I was in hurry, didn't see well... Of course, this is your effort, so big thanks...
Sorry again!
All best!

grafix04

« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2012, 09:33 »
0
I think you should insert some red on CanStockPhoto because Jane and I had a discussion with Duncan over POD's and they do allow POD's unless you opt out of it.

I saw that when I was reading their agreement but that's under the EL license, not under the standard license.

grafix04

« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2012, 09:38 »
0
Ouch! Sorry Grafix!  I was in hurry, didn't see well... Of course, this is your effort, so big thanks...
Sorry again!
All best!

No big deal :)

« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2012, 09:53 »
0
Thanks for making the chart.

I don't sell at FT, but it isn't surprising to see them stand out - not in a good way.

SS doesn't break apart EL purpose, but in looking at my IS ELs, most of them are for multi-seat and unlimited print run (the print or electronic items for resale licenses are much less numerous). And, in the time since I left exclusivity (a year), all but two of the ELs at IS have netted me more than $28 even though they're granting fewer rights to the buyer than a SS buyer would get.


« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2012, 10:07 »
0
Regarding IS, the 500k only applies to printed things - ads, calendars, brochures, etc.  There is no "other", because anything else for sale falls under the EL.

They never invoice for anything over.  If caught, they just try to get them to buy an EL.

Ed

« Reply #18 on: June 05, 2012, 10:55 »
0
Has anyone heard of any agency enforcing this?  I'm just curious how the stock agency would know if their buyer has reproduced something over a certain number of times?  :-\

grafix04

« Reply #19 on: June 05, 2012, 11:43 »
0
Thanks for making the chart.

I don't sell at FT, but it isn't surprising to see them stand out - not in a good way.

SS doesn't break apart EL purpose, but in looking at my IS ELs, most of them are for multi-seat and unlimited print run (the print or electronic items for resale licenses are much less numerous). And, in the time since I left exclusivity (a year), all but two of the ELs at IS have netted me more than $28 even though they're granting fewer rights to the buyer than a SS buyer would get.

That's interesting about the breakdown although I would expect unlimited print runs and multi-seats to be the biggest ones sold.  I wish all agents would break them down like this.

If you don't mind, can I ask you or anyone else who know this.  Have you ever had a case where a buyer purchased a standard license and then exceeds the run?  In the agreement it states that in this "event you shall be required to pay an additional royalty fee equal to US $0.01 for each reproduction which is in excess of 500,000 reproductions." It then mentioned elsewhere that the buyer will be billed for the excess and has 30 days to pay for it.  Does the contributor get his cut for this?

grafix04

« Reply #20 on: June 05, 2012, 11:54 »
0
Regarding IS, the 500k only applies to printed things - ads, calendars, brochures, etc.  There is no "other", because anything else for sale falls under the EL.

You sure, Sean?

(c) Permitted Uses. Subject to the restrictions described under Prohibited Uses below, the following are Permitted Uses of Content:
1.   advertising and promotional projects, including printed materials, product packaging, presentations, film and video presentations, commercials, catalogues, brochures, promotional greeting cards and promotional postcards (ie. not for resale or license);
2.   entertainment applications, such as books and book covers, magazines, newspapers, editorials, newsletters, and video, broadcast and theatrical presentations;
3.   online or electronic publications, including web pages to a maximum of 1200 x 800 pixels for image or illustration Content or to a maximum of 640x480 for video Content;
4.   prints, posters (i.e. a hardcopy) and other reproductions for personal use or promotional purposes specified in (1) above, but not for resale, license or other distribution; and
5.   any other uses approved in writing by iStockphoto.

Where does images used in software fit in?  A promotional email?

Then in the Prohibitions it says:

Quote
either individually or in combination with others, reproduce the Content, or an element of the Content, in excess of 500,000 times without obtaining an Extended License, in which event you shall be required to pay an additional royalty fee equal to US $0.01 for each reproduction which is in excess of 500,000 reproductions. This additional royalty does not apply to advertisements in websites or to broadcast by television, web-cast or theatrical production.

There's no mention of it being just for printed material.

Quote
They never invoice for anything over.  If caught, they just try to get them to buy an EL.

Interesting but here they say:

Quote
5. Excess Reproduction Run
In the event you contravene subparagraph 4(a)(xv) above without purchasing an Extended License, you further agree to notify iStockphoto in the event that you (or a combination of you and others involved with you) reproduce the Content, or an element of the Content in excess of 500,000 times. Such disclosure notice must be sent to iStockphoto each and every month after which the Content, or an element of the Content, has been reproduced in aggregate over the term of this Agreement in excess of 500,000 times. Each such notice must contain the number of reproductions made in any particular month, provided however the first such notice will only be require disclosure of those reproductions which are in excess of 500,000. iStockphoto shall invoice you for the fees associated with such excess use and you agree to pay such invoice within 30 days of receipt.

Are you saying they ignore this and ask them to pay for an EL?   Or maybe they bill them and pocket the extra cash for themselves?

« Reply #21 on: June 05, 2012, 12:49 »
0
Regarding IS, the 500k only applies to printed things - ads, calendars, brochures, etc.  There is no "other", because anything else for sale falls under the EL.

You sure, Sean?

(c) Permitted Uses. Subject to the restrictions described under Prohibited Uses below, the following are Permitted Uses of Content:
1.   advertising and promotional projects, including printed materials, product packaging, presentations, film and video presentations, commercials, catalogues, brochures, promotional greeting cards and promotional postcards (ie. not for resale or license);
2.   entertainment applications, such as books and book covers, magazines, newspapers, editorials, newsletters, and video, broadcast and theatrical presentations;
3.   online or electronic publications, including web pages to a maximum of 1200 x 800 pixels for image or illustration Content or to a maximum of 640x480 for video Content;
4.   prints, posters (i.e. a hardcopy) and other reproductions for personal use or promotional purposes specified in (1) above, but not for resale, license or other distribution; and
5.   any other uses approved in writing by iStockphoto.

Where does images used in software fit in?  A promotional email?
[/quote]

I guess I'm saying the only effective restriction is on print.  You can't measure web traffic.  You can't measure a video audience.  Etc.  The only time you can effectively bust people is when TIME publishes it or something you can find the circulation of.

Quote
5. Excess Reproduction Run
In the event you contravene subparagraph 4(a)(xv) above without purchasing an Extended License, you further agree to notify iStockphoto in the event that you (or a combination of you and others involved with you) reproduce the Content, or an element of the Content in excess of 500,000 times. Such disclosure notice must be sent to iStockphoto each and every month after which the Content, or an element of the Content, has been reproduced in aggregate over the term of this Agreement in excess of 500,000 times. Each such notice must contain the number of reproductions made in any particular month, provided however the first such notice will only be require disclosure of those reproductions which are in excess of 500,000. iStockphoto shall invoice you for the fees associated with such excess use and you agree to pay such invoice within 30 days of receipt.

Are you saying they ignore this and ask them to pay for an EL?   Or maybe they bill them and pocket the extra cash for themselves?
[/quote]

Yes, I'm saying they ignore that and try to have them buy an EL.  I've tried to get them to do the penalty thing, and they don't want to annoy the buyers with that.  So, if you can really substantiate it, you might get an EL.

« Reply #22 on: June 05, 2012, 12:56 »
0

If you don't mind, can I ask you or anyone else who know this.  Have you ever had a case where a buyer purchased a standard license and then exceeds the run? 

I've heard of this only once, at SS - heard about Getty lawsuits over unauthorized uses, but not from the micros.

Given the really poor state of reporting of finances to us, overall, if it had happened, it's not clear we'd know. Once, while I was exclusive, I received a payment from SS for some usage that had apparently "exceeded the circulation limits" and the settlement was to purchase the EL for all the images it used too many times. SS passed on the EL royalties in full (the letter said that rather than deducting legal and admin expenses they'd chosen to pay in full, but I thought the legal and admin expenses of operating the business were part of their take in the first place). This happened in early 2010.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #23 on: June 05, 2012, 13:02 »
0

If you don't mind, can I ask you or anyone else who know this.  Have you ever had a case where a buyer purchased a standard license and then exceeds the run? 
I've heard of this only once, at SS - heard about Getty lawsuits over unauthorized uses, but not from the micros.

It's happened from iStock twice that I know of, both overuses by Time magazine, one of them a photo by our own SNP.

« Reply #24 on: June 05, 2012, 14:39 »
0
Has anyone heard of any agency enforcing this?  I'm just curious how the stock agency would know if their buyer has reproduced something over a certain number of times?  :-\
I remember SS took legal action against a calendar company that hadn't purchased EL's.  Several of us here received a compensation payment that SS passed on to us.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
1826 Views
Last post June 02, 2010, 15:54
by Sean Locke Photography
4 Replies
2515 Views
Last post October 10, 2010, 17:24
by dk
3 Replies
1236 Views
Last post May 21, 2012, 16:49
by heywoody
57 Replies
14917 Views
Last post September 07, 2013, 11:50
by luissantos84
11 Replies
2489 Views
Last post March 01, 2016, 22:46
by Sean Locke Photography

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors