Microstock RF Editorial vs Alamy RM Editorial "L" Licensing

trek

« on: September 02, 2010, 21:53 »

#link

I upload my commercial RF microstock files to Alamy as RF. However, Alamy does not have a RF category for editorial. Do you guys upload your editorial photos to microstock companies and Alamy (as non exclusive RM "L") or do you pick between the two?

Thanks


	Ignore \| Logged

bravajulia

« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2010, 00:10 »

#link

I don't think there are earning in microstock for editorial, so I upload only in L at Alamy


	Ignore \| Logged

RacePhoto

« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2010, 21:58 »

#link

Quote from: scoutingstock on September 02, 2010, 21:53

I don't have one "editorial" shot that could be licensed as RF. How do you get a release for a news shot with people, property or multiple unreleased and protected elements involved? Are you sure you want your RF images as Editorial, or your Editorial images as RF?

I send all of my RM (L) large files to Alamy, most of my RF to Micro. A few better travel and scenic RF shots to Alamy, but not to micro.

Everyone can pick their own market best, based on the images and who they think will find them useful.

Girl with headset, business people shaking hands, sliced tomatoes, happy teen with cell phone, Etc. is probably not a best seller on Alamy. Uquhart castle on Loch Ness, probably isn't a volume item on micro. (please ignore the National Trust issues that may keep it from showing at all on Micro) How about "famous person" at "event" which I feel would sell better on Alamy and can't even be submitted to most micro agencies?

Back to the first question. Is your RF Editorial really news, and why do you want to sell that as RF?


	Ignore \| Logged

BaldricksTrousers

« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2010, 02:36 »

#link

Quote from: RacePhoto on September 04, 2010, 21:58

Quote from: scoutingstock on September 02, 2010, 21:53

I don't have one "editorial" shot that could be licensed as RF. How do you get a release for a news shot with people, property or multiple unreleased and protected elements involved?

This is another misconception. The reason agencies have sold editorial shots only as TL or RM is that when the use is specified there is no risk of a accidental, inappropriate use and they know what the intended use is and would presumably refuse to sell the license if they thought it was going to infringe someone's copyright. With RF, all the onus for tracking the image and ensuring it is not used inappropriately lies with the client, who may hoard an editorial picture for years and forget there is a license restriction. That does not make it illegal to sell an editorial-type image under any license you like but it means that the client has to be extra careful.

Given how excessively paranoid the agencies are over trademarks/copyright in their non-editorial images in order to protect the clients, presumably on the assumption that the user doesn't know the ins and outs of copyright etc.. it is a little surprising that they create potential pitfalls for these same clients by selling RF editorial licenses that are not time limited.


	Ignore \| Logged

trek

« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2010, 07:45 »

#link

Re the question: "Back to the first question. Is your RF Editorial really news, and why do you want to sell that as RF?"

I have editorial photos at SS, DT, BS and 123. Some are newsworthy but most are travel (with people and signage). I consider these agencies to be selling them as RF-editorial because of the pricing structure. I prefer Alamy's pricing structure but sales there are rare.

There does not seem to be a prohibition against selling editorial at both Alamy (RM-L) and the micros. Guess I'm trying to figure out what the rules are.

95% of my port is RF-commercial. I'm new to editorial and enjoy the creative freedom it brings. It provides an outlet for photos that would otherwise end up in the dust bin.

Thanks


« Last Edit: September 05, 2010, 07:49 by scoutingstock »	Ignore \| Logged

RacePhoto

« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2010, 19:24 »

#link

I don't think you can sell an image one place as RF and another as RM. That's the issue. If Micro is RF then selling the same images on Alamy as RM would be a licensing problem.

The buyer has the responsibility for the final use and other legal issues. Micro is somehow neurotic about controlling before the fact. Maybe they assume that buyers don't have a clue? Wink