Author Topic: Alamy Questions (Read 50198 times)

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #50 on:** January 20, 2008, 08:51 »

Quote from: leaf on January 20, 2008, 05:03

So in short. If an image has EVER been sold as RF you CANNOT EVER sell the image as RM

I forget where, but we were discussing this. I was of similar opinion. However, I now agree with the other person who was saying that unless the RM agency you are listing with makes some guarantee as to the history of the image being available, you can do this. Mostly because you are making no claim to what else is out there, and just that Mr X. now has permission to use it for 3 months on a cover. I wouldn't offer it concurrently, however.

sharpshot · « **Reply #51 on:** January 20, 2008, 09:23 »

So what happens if you sell an RM image for use only in one country and the person who has bought it sees it being used by someone else? The person who has bought the RM image will ask for a refund, there are a few threads about refunds in the alamy forums, some of them are a long time after the sale. Is it worth risking losing a big fee and possibly future downloads from an alamy customer?

It might be possible to sell an image that has sold RF as RM but it could cause problems and the loss of sales from alamy.

leaf · « **Reply #52 on:** January 20, 2008, 09:57 »

it just doesn't make sense to sell it at RM after someone has purchased a RF license.

That person who purchased the RF license could use it as they please, while buyer 2 thinks he is buying exclusive rights in europe, or even the world and paying BIG $$ for that, only to find out he doesn't have exclusive rights.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #53 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:28 »

Quote from: sharpshot on January 20, 2008, 09:23

So what happens if you sell an RM image for use only in one country and the person who has bought it sees it being used by someone else?

So what? There is no promise that I know of of exclusivity in any sense.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #54 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:30 »

Quote from: leaf on January 20, 2008, 09:57

That person who purchased the RF license could use it as they please, while buyer 2 thinks he is buying exclusive rights in europe, or even the world and paying BIG $$ for that, only to find out he doesn't have exclusive rights.

As I said, I don't of anything promising exclusivity rights, unless the agency specifically mentions it. All you are granting is permission to use X image in Y capacity for Z time. Of course, you couldn't offer it with the exclusivity clause if it was RF before.

leaf · « **Reply #55 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:50 »

from alamy's page

Quote

To ensure customer confidence in your images and avoid potential legal problems:

* you cannot change the licence type for an image once it is set.
* you must not submit the same or similar images as different licence types.

Check out more info http://www.alamy.com/licensing.asp

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #56 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:52 »

and... ? See - nothing about exclusivity, unless you offer RP.

leaf · « **Reply #57 on:** January 20, 2008, 11:56 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 20, 2008, 11:52

and... ? See - nothing about exclusivity, unless you offer RP.

yes, I agree. This was my statment earlier

"Alamy for example though allows you to list your RM with them, AS WELL as with other companies, I however don't. it is too much trouble to try and keep track of which image sold where and which licenses were purchased, then notify the other agencies where the images can and cannot be used etc. Most agencies wouldn't allow you to sell RM images on another site."

what exactly are we debating here now? perhaps we agree with eachother!

ParisEye · « **Reply #58 on:** January 20, 2008, 12:14 »

It seems to me to be one out out of two choices : either you grant one agency the right to manage all the rights for you (RM) and you don't sell anything anywhere else, or you chose to sell it everywhere to whomever ask and for whatever they offer. But you can't sell it to everybody on one side and grant to some agency an exclusive right on the other side.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #59 on:** January 20, 2008, 12:27 »

Quote from: leaf on January 20, 2008, 11:56

what exactly are we debating here now? perhaps we agree with eachother!

I'm saying that you can offer previously offered RF as RM, since there is no guarantee of exclusivity, unless listed as RP.

Michael · « **Reply #60 on:** January 20, 2008, 16:57 »

Attention with RF and RM licences! for example: You sell an RM photo excklusively for a package. Another costumer use the same photo for another package. The RF-buyer can`t do anything. He has to knew the risk of dubble-printings. but the RM-buyer can do a lot: He can destroy all packages and press the production money from the photographer. Then you don`t looses just the fee. You`ll loos a very big summary of money!

The most RM licences can be exclusicve. But Alamy will asked you bevor they sell it exclusiv for one photo area. Last year i had a selling of a photo from tunesia for a tourist flyer. The Alamy-office asked me do ban the photo for one year for all other usings as tourist-advertising. I got good money for the photo so i decide to do it. but you never can ban a photo which is anywhere offers in rf-licence.

Make a clear decision and break between booth licences. Sell some Photos in RF, some other in RM, but NEVER offer the photos in booth licences.

This is my opinion, and sorry for my bad english

madelaide · « **Reply #61 on:** January 20, 2008, 17:26 »

I have images offered as RM in FP and MyLoupe that I have elsewhere as RF (in sites that only take RF). If I sell the RM, I delete the RF from other sites, and vice-versa. In a direct negotiation, if a person is interested in a RM license of an image I sold as RF before, I'd say that and offer the RF license instead of the RM. Now, if the buyer prefers the RM anyway, he knows what he is doing.

Now, what is RP?

Regards,
Adelaide

tommroch · « **Reply #62 on:** February 16, 2008, 10:13 »

Hello Madelaide, I am currently reading through Alamy's agreement and Iam also having trouble understanding section 7:

7 Contributor reporting of sales to Alamy

a. The Contributor shall report all sales made by the Contributor or the Contributor’s Sub Agents where either a sale was made where a Customer has stated that the Image they require was found on the web site maintained by any company in the Alamy Group, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor. A statement by a customer as to where they first found an Image shall be conclusive evidence as between the Contributor and Alamy as to whether the Image was found via the Alamy web site.
b. The Contributor shall report the sale and pay 10% of the sale value (net of any transaction or sales tax including VAT) to Alamy within 30 days of receiving payment for the sale.

Would anyone else care to interpret this please?

thanks

Quote from: madelaide on January 19, 2008, 19:20

There is nothing like a rainy night to give me patience to read the license agreement... Can anyone help me with some comprehension issues?

1) What is "Novel use"?

2) What does this paragraph mean?
Quote
Where the Contributor appoints Alamy as its agent to grant Royalty-Free Licences in respect of an Image, Alamy may vary the Licences it grants in respect of that Image from Royalty-Free to Traditional by giving 45 days prior notice to the Contributor at any time. If the Contributor notifies Alamy during the 45 day notice period that it does not agree to such variation then Alamy may either continue to grant Royalty-Free Licences in respect of that Image or, at Alamy’s option, may delete that Image from the System.

3) And this one? If someone buys the same image elsewhere, I have to pay Alamy a commission??
Quote
The Contributor shall report all sales made by the Contributor or the Contributor’s Sub Agents where either a sale was made where a Customer has stated that the Image they require was found on the web site maintained by any company in the Alamy Group, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor. A statement by a customer as to where they first found an Image shall be conclusive evidence as between the Contributor and Alamy as to whether the Image was found via the Alamy web site.
The Contributor shall report the sale and pay 10% of the sale value (net of any transaction or sales tax including VAT) to Alamy within 30 days of receiving payment for the sale.
Also in paragraph 14d they talk about that. How can I know if a buyer saw the image first in Alamy and they purchased it elsewhere??

4) Does selecting distribution locations work for RM only or RF as well? Can it be set on a per-image basis?

5) As far as I understand, they call RM "Traditional Licence", yet it can be with or without Rights Protection, is that so? I'm confused. RFxRM I understand. What is "Traditional" then and if it's RM how can it be "without Rights Protection"?

Regards,
Adelaide

tommroch · « **Reply #63 on:** February 16, 2008, 11:00 »

Here is the related section 14 that Madelaide mentions.
I can't make much sense of this either.

14 Audit Rights of Alamy on Contributor

1. Alamy shall have the right, not more than once every calendar year, to audit the records of the Contributor to check that sales made by the Contributor which have either originated from a search of the Alamy Group web site, or where Alamy has provided a high resolution Image for the fulfilment of the sale by a Contributor, are being reported and paid in line with the reporting requirements detailed in the sections entitled Contributor reporting of sales to Alamy Clause a). An independent accountant or lawyer or a member of the Alamy Group internal audit team may carry out the audit.
2. The Alamy Group shall give 30 days’ notice before any such audit shall take place.
3. The audit of the Contributor shall be paid for by the Alamy Group except where the Contributor is found to have underpaid amounts due to the Alamy Group in excess of US$500 in any 12 month period, above which level the Contributor will have to pay the costs of the audit.
4. Alamy also reserves the right to carry out spot checks on Contributors to assess whether they are complying with the requirement to report sales which have originated from a search of the Alamy Group web site. These spot checks may include, but are not limited to, contacting Customers or other third parties who have downloaded an Image to see if they have bought the Image direct from the Contributor and buying via a third party an Image from the Contributor, in respect of which the Contributor agrees a refund shall be given if demanded.

PecoFoto · « **Reply #64 on:** February 16, 2008, 16:01 »

Quote from: tommroch on February 16, 2008, 10:13

Hello Madelaide, I am currently reading through Alamy's agreement and Iam also having trouble understanding section 7:

It means if you sell an image directly to a client that was first seen by them on Alamy then you are to advise Alamy of the fact and pay them 10%

tommroch · « **Reply #65 on:** February 16, 2008, 17:39 »

Quote from: PecoFoto on February 16, 2008, 16:01

Quote from: tommroch on February 16, 2008, 10:13
Hello Madelaide, I am currently reading through Alamy's agreement and Iam also having trouble understanding section 7:

It means if you sell an image directly to a client that was first seen by them on Alamy then you are to advise Alamy of the fact and pay them 10%

Thank you PecoFoto

madelaide · « **Reply #66 on:** February 17, 2008, 15:21 »

But how can we know if a buyer saw it in Alamy and they purchased in another site? $:-\$

Regards,
Adelaide

Phil · « **Reply #67 on:** February 17, 2008, 16:46 »

averaged over the past 6 months alamy has made about the same as dreamstime for me.

BUT most of my sales are images that wouldn't get into the micros for 'poor lighting' or 'not stock'. If they did get into micros they wouldn't do well (but then there is a lot of stuff that doesn't sell, rather than 100 images each making $5 it is 2 images each make $250, 98 make $0)

graficallyminded · « **Reply #68 on:** February 21, 2008, 09:35 »

Do you guys take the time to fill in all of the keyword sections? I was just curious...that would take a while if I were to upload my entire portfolio.

PecoFoto · « **Reply #69 on:** February 21, 2008, 15:56 »

Quote from: graficallyminded on February 21, 2008, 09:35

Do you guys take the time to fill in all of the keyword sections? I was just curious...that would take a while if I were to upload my entire portfolio.

Yes, and its a pain. If you keyword in Photoshop and leave the commas in they come up like this 'keyword1,, keyword2,,' I'm not sure if this effects the search results - probably not.

PecoFoto · « **Reply #70 on:** February 21, 2008, 16:02 »

Quote from: madelaide on February 17, 2008, 15:21

But how can we know if a buyer saw it in Alamy and they purchased in another site? $:-\$

Regards,
Adelaide

I think it only applies if the customer tells you they saw it on Alamy and you negotiate a price with the customer and sell it directly without going through Alamy or another agency.

araminta · « **Reply #71 on:** February 21, 2008, 16:19 »

Quote from: graficallyminded on February 21, 2008, 09:35

Do you guys take the time to fill in all of the keyword sections? I was just curious...that would take a while if I were to upload my entire portfolio.

Alamy is the site which explains the most how their search engine works and what are the most important points to improve your visibility.

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-keywording.asp
http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamysearch/stock-photography-alamysearch.asp

The Alamy ranking is essential and to improve your ranking, you definitively have to define very carefully your keywords and avoid any irrelevant ones (they would impact negatively your ranking).

The AlamyMeasures tool is quite impressive as it helps you to know precisely which keywords are the most used by the buyers for each photo.

The conclusion for me is that you HAVE TO define your keywords more precisely at Alamy as compared to any other microstock site IMHO.

In fact, I think it is by far better to have a quite small diversified portfolio with very accurate keywords rather than a big portfolio with more or less relevant keywords. This is macrostock not microstock ant the rules are different... the commission too

Just my thoughts.

Phil · « **Reply #72 on:** February 21, 2008, 18:02 »

i do the alamy keywords, cut and paste into each section and pick out the most relevant for 50 character part.

rf / rm

if someone licences an image as rm they are supposed to be able to request what other uses it has been used for, even without paying the extra to use it exclusive they may want to check to make sure there competition hasn't used it, some other company isn't going to run an advert using the same image in the same media (even for a totally different product) etc etc. Basically they want to make sure it aint going to go bad for them.

there are a number of cases of problems with rf images -> Dell and Gateway used the same image in a promotion, office supply companies using same image. The blonde girl that colorvision used for all its product and packaging stuff was used on a number of porn sites and to advertise 'enlargement' medication by a couple of companies

thats the breaks when you use RF. So if both of those companies has bought rf then too bad for them, and if both bought RM and haven't checked previous / current usage then again bad luck. BUT if the one bought RF and the other RM, then one who bought RM is going to go straight back to the agency and ask questions. Very simply they are likely to sue for all costs and damages, and I dont think the agency wont protect the photographer in these cases. Personally I wouldn't like to face someone like dell deciding I screwed up a national / international advertising campaign.

Just my thoughts

araminta · « **Reply #73 on:** February 21, 2008, 18:23 »

Quote from: rustyphil on February 21, 2008, 18:02

rf / rm
...
Personally I wouldn't like to face someone like dell deciding I screwed up a national / international advertising campaign.

Very interesting thoughts indeed. Thanks!

Do you have such interesting thoughts about having the same RF photo at Alamy and on other microstock sites? I've decided myself not to have the same RF picture on both side of the macro/micro border, but I was just wondering what would be the reaction of a buyer who purchase a RF license at Alamy for $200 and then discover the same picture at SS for $1.

Your thoughts are welcome

Phil · « **Reply #74 on:** February 26, 2008, 22:19 »

hi, yes I have issues with this ethically. about half my alamy collection is on micro. I was deleting images from micros if they sold on alamy, in the view that someone would then never see it. But then one of my best sellers on micro sold at a small size on alamy, my cut was what less than what I make in a month, so I couldn't bring myself to delete it.

I spoke to about 20-30 people that I know (none of them photogs) what they thought. every single one of them said that to sell it both. most of them saying about different prices at different shops and how they'd been ripped off somewhere. Personally though there is a lot of difference between $5 and $350. (although alamy rf = full extended licence so $100+ on istock but cheaper elsewhere)

My wife and a few other microstockers I know point to fact that there is quite a number of people doing both, including some of the higher profile photogs. but that is saying 'well they do it so can I'

1 person I know says you might as well make the money from both now, because the macro will be dead within 5 years and you wont be able to then.

so, I do it, but it is something I am uncomfortable about.

Phil

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Alamy Questions (Read 50198 times)

Sean Locke Photography

sharpshot

leaf

Sean Locke Photography

Sean Locke Photography

leaf

Sean Locke Photography

leaf

ParisEye

Sean Locke Photography

Michael

madelaide

tommroch

tommroch

PecoFoto

tommroch

madelaide

Phil

graficallyminded

PecoFoto

PecoFoto

araminta

Phil

araminta

Phil

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors