MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Quick question about selling my images  (Read 2969 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 19, 2008, 06:55 »

When I upload an image for sale on a stock site, who is the actual seller?

1. ME?
2. The stock site?

My first thought is it's me. Because I am the copyright holder, and it is illegal for them to sell any of my images.
My second thought is it's them, because they act as a broker to facilitate the sale.

Perhaps there is something in the user agreement? I hate reading the fine print.



« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2008, 08:11 »
The answer is 1 - You.

The sites are purely agencies used to market and distribute your images under a license for which they take a fee/percentage of the sale.

And all content responsibilty lies with you the image producer, which is why I've sent you that message on Dreamstime.

As a side note Getty commision some photographers to shoot stock for a fee and the result is then Getty own and sell the images.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2008, 08:13 by RT »

« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2008, 10:46 »
As a side note Getty commision some photographers to shoot stock for a fee and the result is then Getty own and sell the images.
Another sidebar: I once met a photographer who was doing this. A large regional corporation hired Getty to shoot custom images, and they subcontracted him to do it. I found it amusing that a) he was from NYC and they flew him out to Vancouver to do the job b) they supplied him with a Hasselblad digital camera, and c) he was a part-timer: the only reason he got the job was that he had a friend who was an editor at Getty.

Nice work if you can get it, huh?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2008, 11:06 by sharply_done »

« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2008, 16:16 »
The easiest way to look at this is this.

The stock agencies are tools in our vast tool chest to promote our images for sale. the commission that they take is like a tool rental.

We as photographers own the copyrights we just use the companies to promote our images. Now in the cases of the stolen images being submitted the owner of the copyrights is the solely responsible for initiating claims of wrong doing. Also if the copyright owner wants to pursue the offending person in legal actions, he/she must be the one filling the claim or a lawyer in their behalf.

So the copyright owner needs to be vigil in keeping up with his images and where they may be used. This may seem daunting to alot that have large portfolios on many sites. But this is one of the choices that you made when you decided in going into stock photography.

« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2008, 12:47 »
if that were true, why then are all MS agencies so concerned [rightly] about copyright and model releases?   

yes, photog owns the copyright, but the agency has the right to sell the images and they are the seller in this case -- the MS is the one who takes the customers money, and deals with any problems. 

in the US, this can effect your taxes -- royalties like these are treated differently from direct income [eg,  you dont pay social security taxes on royalties].

so, in re piracy, it is both the photographers AND the MS who are responsible



Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
Last post February 20, 2007, 20:26
by Kngkyle
4 Replies
Last post March 13, 2013, 20:27
by dbvirago
11 Replies
Last post December 17, 2013, 10:05
by 60D
6 Replies
Last post June 24, 2016, 05:52
by ShadySue
5 Replies
Last post September 20, 2016, 21:50
by etudiante_rapide


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle