What would be the best description to replace RF

[Semmick Photo]

What would be the best description to replace Royalty Free?

Full Paid Rights
Once Off Royalty
One Fee All Rights
All Rights Paid

Suggestions?

Would there ever be a change for this confusing name? Who invented that name anyway and why can't it be changed?

[dirkr]

No idea where it comes from, but the issue is the word "free" and the missing word "license".

Therefore a better name could be "Comprehensive Rights License" as opposed to "Restricted Rights License" (which could replace RM, though it does not adress the "managing of the rights" part, i.e. the keeping of a usage history to enable the granting of specific exclusivity rights).

[Shelma1]

It was created in the days when professionals were the only ones licensing images and had to pay royalties for each use. Now all sorts of people use images and I guess have no idea what the heck royalties are. "Pay-once images" might work, but it's not the most enticing language.

[ShadySue]

What would be the best description to replace Royalty Free?

Full Paid Rights
Once Off Royalty
One Fee All Rights
All Rights Paid

Suggestions?

Would there ever be a change for this confusing name? Who invented that name anyway and why can't it be changed?

None of these, unless you were concurrently doing away with ELs and equivalents.

[Semmick Photo]

Any suggestions Sue?

[Jo Ann Snover]

Any suggestion of "all rights" would be very bad because there are tons of things you can't do with the current agency licenses, even extended licenses.

Perpetual limited license would be descriptive, but it doesn't have much of a ring. Then you'd have a Perpetual extended license for the ELs.

The key thing is that the term of the license is forever; the "what" is the set of restrictions laid out by each agency. License is important because that's what you're buying, not the image itself.

[PaulieWalnuts]

How about No-Longer-Royalty-Free? Ok ok I'd say something like Rights Enhanced.

I'd prefer if it was done away with. An unrestricted right license should cost a ton more but is actually the cheapest license.

Who invented it? I dunno. No sane business person would ever create a product that costs money and uses the name free in it. "Hey everybody come check out my new Chevy Cost Free" or "My Nikon Price Free".

I'm using a hybrid license on my site. It's Rights Managed but i'm simplifying it to make using it easier.

[ShadySue]

Any suggestions Sue?

No, because I wish they'd never invented RF!
(Ooops didn't read Paulie's post before I posted.)
Of course, it benefits the buyers, but led to the race to the bottom, even when it was macro RF.

[Uncle Pete]

For the imaginary own site that I've never worked up, my idea was something else. No RF or same giveaway rights, under any other name. I made up my own license.

It would be a Single Use License. Plain and simple, one download, one use. Unlike RM it would not be as restrictive, wouldn't ask what the use was, publication, location, size or much else except - If it would go over a print run of 250,000 or used on a product or as a print. Then an EL would be needed.

It would be a simple, single use license. For as long as the site used it, or the magazine wanted, and if in syndication, that would be one use, all outlets included.

What I'm suggesting is, RF should be executed and something new given life. RM and others are just fine, but the unlimited, uncontrolled, unrestricted aspects of RF are just absurd. Especially on some sites where it's a lifetime use, unlimited, forever for one simple sub DL?

And we worry about illegal use and misuse? HA! With a license some just paid a pittance for unlimited legal use.

No, because I wish they'd never invented RF!
(Ooops didn't read Paulie's post before I posted.)
Of course, it benefits the buyers, but led to the race to the bottom, even when it was macro RF.

[Semmick Photo]

Pete, Canva has a single use licence as well.

[Semmick Photo]

So how can this RF term be changed then? What would it take to change it?

Is it up to the agencies? Or is there some authority on this?

[Shelma1]

I doubt it will change. The term is used for any content that pays royalties, not just images.