MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Sensitive usages  (Read 1242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 24, 2015, 19:26 »
0
I'm submitting my work to SS, 123RF, and FT. I've opted out from sensitive usages in SS. However, in other two sites, I cannot find any such option. Does that mean people who by photos from 123RF and FT can use them for sensitive usages?


ShadySue

« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2015, 20:05 »
+1
Assuming an Ft user bothers to go searching for the Standard Licence conditions (not super easy to find), clause 3.1 has:
You must not ...
use the Work in a way that places any person in the photo in a bad light or depicts them in a way that they may find offensive - this includes, but is not limited to:
    the use of Works in pornography;
    tobacco ads;
    ads for adult entertainment clubs or similar venues, including escort or similar services;
    political endorsements;
    uses that are defamatory, or otherwise contain unlawful, offensive or immoral content.

To be honest, "in a way that they might find offensive" is so wide, I'd be nervous of using a people pic from there. That doesn't even invoke the mythical 'reasonable person'. Looks like the model has infinite leeway for offence.

Eventually I found, on 123RF's site, the Licence Agreement of which Clause 4 says:
"...(m) under any circumstances use Content in connection with any pornographic, offensive, political, racist, ethnically or culturally offensive, obscene or indecent, sexually explicit, immoral, defamatory, intrusive of privacy or illegal materials; or in a manner which endorses violence or acts of terrorism, is discriminatory towards race, gender, religion, faith or sexual orientation, or which purports to endorse products or services carrying sensitive mental/health connotations;

(n) use Content featuring a model or property in connection with a subject that would be unflattering or unduly controversial to a reasonable person, unless the scope of the model or property release for such Content specifically allows or covers such intended use and You accompany each such use with a statement that clearly indicates that: (i) the Content is being used for illustrative purposes only; and (ii) any person depicted in the Content, if any, is a model;"


I presume from your question that you also found that information difficult to find on both sites, so you'd have to ask yourself how many buyers will seek it out.
From the number of iS editorials in-uses which do not credit as required by their T&C (artist/iStockphoto) (about half of the editorial in-uses I've found), I'm sure a significant number of buyers don't bother with T&Cs. In fact, if you didn't know they existed, why would you even think to go looking for them?






« Last Edit: September 24, 2015, 20:31 by ShadySue »

« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2015, 21:15 »
0
Thank you for your reply and finding out those lines from T&C. It's not easy to find them. So, if I understood correctly, sensitive usages are prohibited by FT and 123RF by default.

ShadySue

« Reply #3 on: September 25, 2015, 05:44 »
+1
Thank you for your reply and finding out those lines from T&C. It's not easy to find them. So, if I understood correctly, sensitive usages are prohibited by FT and 123RF by default.
Yes, but how many buyers would know that is moot.

« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2015, 05:46 »
0
Thank you for your reply and finding out those lines from T&C. It's not easy to find them. So, if I understood correctly, sensitive usages are prohibited by FT and 123RF by default.
Yes, but how many buyers would know that is moot.

Yeah, I totally agree with you. Many buyers would not bother about reading all those T&C.

« Reply #5 on: September 25, 2015, 05:50 »
+1
But I hope it guarantees that contributors are safe in legal cases. Buyers cannot say that they didn't read/understand T&C.

ShadySue

« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2015, 05:54 »
0
But I hope it guarantees that contributors are safe in legal cases. Buyers cannot say that they didn't read/understand T&C.
Maybe; but legislation is different in different places, and quite probably here, the way these sites (esp 123RF) are set up at the moment, there would be a defence based on how well hidden the prohibitions are.
Remember, you are the one who was concerned, yet you couldn't find them.

NB, the T&C aren't easy to find on SS.

However, that would be more liable to affect the site than the tog.
Probably.
But The Law is too often An Ass.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 06:00 by ShadySue »


 

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results