I  just like to share a recent experience I had with one of the agencies, fotolia for naming it but it doesn't matter that much I think.
I was contacted by one of the staff member asking for details for one of my picture (a cat) because a client wanted to use it for a cat food package. I gave them the info and few hours latter the picture was bough but under a traditional licence. I was a bit surprised because I'm selling quite well cats pictures for the same purpose and they are purchased under EL. So I asked fotolia if this was not a mistake and the day after an EL licence was purchased. About a week later I got a message from fotolia saying that EL was nor needed for the purpose.
I cant tell if the same client has purchased the picture under two licences or what has happened there, but this has brought some confusion in my head...h
I must say honestly that I have never read in detail the term of the contracts at the various agencies (I find this part of the job a bit boring), but this story raised the question of my thread : "Are agencies informing well client when EL is needed?"
The client should to my opinion been clearly informed of the condition of use. I have no clue if clients are so ignorant of the details of the licence as I' am (but this is the photographers privilege..), but I think they shouldnt be allowed to be...
Is anyone have an experience as client or have similar experience???

best

jean

click_click , you say : What can you do? Move your stuff to the trads...

But what good is that going to do? they won't sell there, would it?

But what good is that going to do? they won't sell there, would it?

Sorry, got a bit carried away in the last one...

It depends on the buyer. If you have buyer who only wants to spend $5 or less for an image that's going on a product packaging, of course, they are not going to spend $500 on it. Then you will not sell the image on a trad agency.

But, and this is the case if you have a buyer who wants exclusive usage rights for a specific amount of time you will sell the image on a trad agency for a lot more money.

If they really cared about their product, they most likely don't want an image that's been sold many times through the micros and take the risk that the image appears in a different context. There is a buyer for everything...

Example: You have an image of a cat and the cat food company wants to put the cat on their cat food bags. They want a cheap image and buy it off some Microstock agency. They most likely don't think far enough, that the image is still being sold to other people at the same time. Also consider that as a photographer you can not put any sales restriction on the image which means the image can be used in many many ways.

Now, PETA comes along and starts a campaign against animal cruelty and needs an image of a pretty innocent cat. Assuming they bought your image as well and use it in one of their TV campaigns, you will soon realize that there is a conflict of interest going on. It has nothing to do with you. It's just the fact that if a client wants it cheap - they might run into a lot of trouble that way.

Again, that's why I said: If you keep your stuff on the trads - you will sell your images only to buyers that are a lot more educated/smarter to prevent such things from happening and besides you make a lot more money that way as well.

On another note. Take Yuri's images. They are EVERYWHERE. Consider that some companies just want it cheap and then also that there are buyers who want to be unique. Like I said, there is a buyer for everything. It just hurts when the little ones on the micros are being screwed over because they simply can not take legal actions.