Hi,

Yesterday I noticed that some emoticons I made are appearing in an iPhone app that is for sale at the Apple Appstore. I have a good feeling that all these were bought from Fotolia a couple of days ago, as they were all downloaded simultaneously and is available in that specific app I'm referring to, just the next day. I can say for sure that these emoticons, regardless of which agency the licenses was bought from, have been downloaded with standard licenses as none of them have ever been bought with an extended license.

Some details about the app: It allows you to attach an emoticon (all bought from microstock agencies apparently) to a status update, then post it on Facebook.
The reason why it really upsets me is that I'm currently working with another company who has invested a lot of money into getting me to draw custom emoticons for the very same kind of application (this app came first, by the way). For the ones that I'm having for sales on the agencies, I have personally given this company I work with my word (and a written contract) that allows them to use the emoticons in such a way that they can be reproduced or "posted" on Facebook by its customers.

I have a great interest in figuring out if the copycat app can actually use my images in this way with a simple standard license from Fotolia. Does any agency allow this? Not only do they now use some of the same content as the app I work for, they are also calling it the same.

I'm planning on contacting the developers, but need to know which approach I can allow myself to have to this matter. If a standard license doesn't allow this kind of usage, I'm going to ask them to remove the images from their app. If, however, it turns out to be perfectly legit, I have to try to sort this out with them in another way.

I think the information can be found here: http://eu.fotolia.com/Info/Agreements#3. , but I simply don't know how to interpret this lawyer language as English isn't my native language, and I'm having a hard time trying to figure out what terms such as "resale" actually covers.

Thanks for your help

Thomas

I am not an attorney and I do not upload to Fotolia anymore, but a couple of weeks ago I combed through 4 other sites' agreements, and typically, if an image or art is going to be used in something that is resold (i.e. templates for powerpoint, templates for websites, etc.) they require an extended license. I know this because I found some of my images being used in powerpoint templates for sale.

Probably not much help, but just my input.

^^^ Personally I wouldn't agree with Sean's interpretation. To me the restriction 'distributed via mobile telephone devices' means just that and does not have to be qualified by how it is used.

I'd say it might also be covered by Restriction (e) too;

(e) use, reproduce, distribute or display the Work in connection with design template applications intended for resale;

Why not phone FT via your 'local' number and see what they have to say on the matter. I'd say the use definitely requires an EL.

Thanks, I appreciate all your responses.

Specifically (c) and (e) stood out to me and could possibly be the solution to my problem, but unfortunately sjlocke might have a good point about (c).
Just sent a support ticket so I guess I'll see what Fotolia has to say about that matter.
Unfortunately Fotolia doesn't have an "Electronic items for resale" license as iStock, as a matter of fact they have just one, Vector Extended RF license, covering probably all sorts of stuff.

I wonder if an iPhone app is covered by "templates" ?