Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on January 25, 2012, 13:08

Quote from: rinderart on January 25, 2012, 12:58

Heres the problem regardless.... Whos gonna catch these people and whos gonna spend the countless hours and days searching to find these people....The sites?? Forget about it. They help when and if we find them. There was a site posted on SS last week in the Netherlands that does nothing but put up Images to use as Prints and wallpaper for your living room at prices in the thousands of dollars. No credit is given. I wrote them as did others asking to see the license they have to do this. They wrote back saying all is legit. they bought them at DT and can do anything they want. OK....lets see, If I spend a few thousand dollars and buy the top Landscape Images and open a POD site and charge $500/$1000 for a print. Im good to go? The artist gets nothing except a Sale....Once. The site makes Money and I can print as many as I can sell without so much as a credit to the artist.. That sucks Big Time and sites should be ashamed for allowing this. Thats a big Black eye in My view about this business.

+1 that's the site i was speaking about somewhere on theses forums where they buy an EL and then do POD's for upwards of $3000 a pop and all you the photographer gets is the measly $25!!!!

Something is really wrong with that.

Yeah, that you didn't beat them to it.

LOL. Good thing is . I must have thought about it a long time ago I got about half way In and I already Opted out. Just for my paintings.

There might be even bigger problem with classic RF license, not just with EL...
I heard that you don't need EL for image use on postcards...

So, if buyer need an image for postcards for example, standard RF license allow him reproduction of the same image for 250.000 copies, only for subscription price of cca 0.30$
Maybe 250.000 is not too big number for New York Paris or London postcards, but for some little town somewhere in Croatia is lifetime edition... I have seen lot of my pics on postcards in the nearest tobacco shop...
I am desperate!  

So, tell me where are we here?

The most important part of this issue of ELs and PODs is the transference of rights.

RF licenses, even ELs, are usually not transferable to third parties (the opposite would be absurd given the nature of RF).
POD user agreements require the user to be able to grant the POD site a worldwide transferable license.

If a buyer gets an EL and makes the POD himself or a POD site buys an EL, it's all right. Otherwise the ELs and POD agreements are not entirely compatible.

Rinder.. We are being abused.
...
Thats because there are 800 million photographers out there. In Indian ad China,
...
So Rinder, this is globalisation, get used to work for a bowl of rice every day.
its all good.

JPS

I don't see lot of Indian or Chinese contributors who participate on this forum.... Do you?
I can't find any more link of Fotolia contributor chart that you can see how many contributors are there, in India and China...
There was incredibly small number of contributors from that part of world...

Quote from: KuriousKat on January 25, 2012, 16:01

Quote from: sjlocke on January 25, 2012, 15:30

"If someone other than you is the owner of the image or appears in it or has created the text, you must obtain such permission from those persons."

An extended license would be permission, imo.

I don't think so.....

As per Zazzle: You must own all rights (including copyright) in the image and text you upload or have the written permission of ALL persons who own (a) the rights to upload the image or text and (b) the rights to authorize the uses permitted in the User Agreement. If someone other than you is the owner of the image or appears in it or has created the text, you must obtain such permission from those persons. If you upload any image or text that violates our User Agreement, your account may be terminated.

So, you must either own the copyright or have written permission from All persons who own the image rights, (artist),  and the rights to authorise the uses permitted in the User Agreement, (Stock Site). An extended licence would only fulfil the second part of this  but you would still need the artist to relinquish the copyright in writing.

"Written permission" = "the license agreement of the site you downloaded from that allows such usage".

Yes, but it states written permission from ALL persons AND ownership of copyright. No RF EL gives the artist's copyright to the purchaser and the licence agreement only provides the relevant usage rights not the required image rights.

Quote from: borg on January 25, 2012, 16:19

I heard that you don't need EL for image use on postcards...

If you want to sell those postcards, you'll need an EL.

Are you sure?

Once before I posted here same problem and old contributors were told that buyers don't need EL for postcards till 250K of copies...

Quote from: JPSDK on January 25, 2012, 16:50

Rinder.. We are being abused.
...
Thats because there are 800 million photographers out there. In Indian ad China,
...
So Rinder, this is globalisation, get used to work for a bowl of rice every day.
its all good.

JPS

I don't see lot of Indian or Chinese contributors who participate on this forum.... Do you?

Thats right. They are still not so abundant. But they are out there. And they will find the way. But since they are super economical with their time, you will not find them chatting on the forums, but being busy uploading.
There is a language problem, be happy for that.

Quote from: KuriousKat on January 25, 2012, 18:04

Yes, but it states written permission from ALL persons AND ownership of copyright. No RF EL gives the artist's copyright to the purchaser and the licence agreement only provides the relevant usage rights not the required image rights.

No it doesn't.  It says "OR".

You are right - it does say 'or' but it also says:
or have the written permission of ALL persons who own (a) the rights to upload the image or text and (b) the rights to authorize the uses permitted in the User Agreement. If someone other than you is the owner of the image or appears in it or has created the text, you must obtain such permission from those persons

I am pretty sure that any way you slice this one, you can't legitimately buy a stock image and use it in your products for a Zazzle store.

I remember joining this forum just because another thread that was related to this issue and I found it to be an issue that interested me enough to join in and talk.

Zazzle says a lot of things on its Non Exclusive License Agreement, many are incompatible with the average RF license.
Some of those incompatible points are:

- Zazzle requires the uploader to grant a license (nonexclusive, worldwide, transferable, sublicensable right to use, reproduce, publicly display, sell, and distribute the Design in or on Products and in advertising, marketing, samples, and promotional materials for the purpose of promoting the Site and Products) to Zazzle. How can a RF buyer grant this kind of broad license to others without it being dangerous to RF business model itself?

- Zazzle requires the uplaoder to represent that:
* You are the owner of the Design or that the Design is in the public domain; and
* You have the legal right grant this license to Zazzle and to enter into this Agreement; and
* To your knowledge, no one else claims ownership of, or exclusive rights to, the Design; and
* Zazzle may legally make and sell Products incorporating the Design without infringing the rights of any third party and without being obligated to make any payments to, or obtain any permission from, any third party; and


I am not a lawyer, but it looks to me that the requirements cannot be fulfilled by any RF buyer.

It wouldn't make any sense to RF business if a buyer could make such claims or could give third parties licenses like the one Zazzle requires. Zazzle agreement is not much different from those of agencies. If a buyer can upload to Zazzle, it can upload also to almost any other site with a similar agreement, like other agencies.

Quote from: KuriousKat on January 27, 2012, 09:37

You are right - it does say 'or' but it also says:
or have the written permission of ALL persons who own (a) the rights to upload the image or text and (b) the rights to authorize the uses permitted in the User Agreement. If someone other than you is the owner of the image or appears in it or has created the text, you must obtain such permission from those persons

I am pretty sure that any way you slice this one, you can't legitimately buy a stock image and use it in your products for a Zazzle store.

The person who uploads the image to the stock site has (a) the rights and (b) the right to authorize the uses in the UA, which would be what is allowed by an extended license (written permission).

I know that I'm am not a lawyer, (and I'm not trying to be difficult - honest!), but it's the bold part I was going with. If you sell an image under an RF licence, even with an EL, you still OWN the image, therefore anyone wanting to use it on a Zazzle products would still need to obtain your written permission would't they? The licence on purchase from a stock site doesn't give ownership but just certain usage rights I think.

It would be great if someone could give a definitive answer as I may well be labouring under a lot of misapprehensions.

My issue with their license terms is the book and CD/DVD cover being allowed with the standard license.

Same as iStock, then.