MicrostockGroup

From another thread here:


So I'm curious. & maybe I am misunderstanding. What is the issue upsetting people about fonts?

Is that vectors should not contain fonts? A text as a vector would be like redistributing the font so I can understand the problem. But fonts seem to be fine in photographs and 3D renders. That makes sense.

Or is there some other issue? I was away from IStock for a while has this been an issue recently ?

But because the issue was raised, I was thinking there was maybe some new instruction Pieman. Sometimes the policy gets adjusted and tweaked ahead of the manuals.

No, there is nothing new.

The policy for vectors has always been (as is listed in the Illustrator's manual)



This also applies to completely hand drawn fonts that do not at all resemble copyrighted fonts (other than they are obviously alphabetical characters, of course).

This means that vector contributors at istock are not allowed, for instance, to design a calendar page with completely original illustration and typography. They are not allowed to illustrate letterforms and sell those individually or as a set.

However, on the raster side, they are ringing up thousands and thousands of sales with things like this:
example 1
and this:
example 2
and this:
example 3

A few lucky souls have managed to slip through the very profitable cracks:
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_search.php?action=file&lightboxID=3815234

I don't think you really started an argument. I completely agree with you.

It's just one of those things that some have grown weary of questioning. Not that it has changed from being a completely unfair double standard, but that after about 3 years of "discussion" it is obvious they have no intention of revisiting their policy. To vent frustration, some start lightboxes to illustrate the point. Some even make theirs public.

If you do some searches on the istock vector forum, you'll see that it's been discussed ad nauseum.