MicrostockGroup

"editorial" does not mean you are not offering the content as RF.  You are not allowed to offer any content RF elsewhere, assuming you are talking about iStock.

editorial vs. commercial
RF vs. RM

example: SS sells "editorial" under an RF license.

And bottom line of all of that: I can't become exclusive with IS and keep the so-called editorial images on other agencies, correct?

Well, I am not selling them to my local newspaper, but to other agencies equivalent to IS (DT, SS)... I wouldn't bother asking if there were not the direct IS competition.

The question is, Sean, why do you even bother? 

hroe, it's really simple: You can't have any images for sale at any micro agency, because (AFAIK) all micro agencies sell is RF. It doesn't matter if they are editorial or not, it matters simply whether they are RF or not.

If you sell RM (editorials or otherwise) at Alamy, for example, that's fine. Just no RF, anywhere.

I really wish that IS would sell editorial images, but I don't think that will ever happen.

both ss and dt are selling editorial images with a rf licence, meaning they're sold without registering who the buyers are. so, you wouldn't be able to go exclusive with is in this case. however, if you were to sell these same editorial images at alamy with a rm licence (registering every single buyer along the way), then you're gold. by the way, alamy only sell editorials with rm licence, no ifs or buts. that's one of the differences between microstock and macrostock.

^^ Well said.  That should clear up any confusion

again, is reuters selling your editorial image with a rf or rm licence? that's your assignment for the day.

Your photojournalism career is irrelevant to not selling RF anywhere else if you are interested in being an iStock exclusive.

Does anyone read the details of how they are licensing their content?

  I know just how you feel.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

love it. 

you're good to go then.  from what country are you submitting to reuters?