pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stock Agencies vs YouTube on copyrights  (Read 741 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 26, 2021, 03:27 »
0
funny, Youtube does not have ANY of the crazy copyright restrictions that stock companies have.

YouTube allows you to post videos with tattoos, videos of buildings like the Empire State Building, Hollywood sign, sports venues where you have to buy a ticket, people who are 'identifiable' by their clothes, videos that contain other artwork and photos.

I guess YouTube hasn't learned yet? (this is sarcasm)

The stock companies have been misinterpreting copyright laws for a long time. Hopefully some day they will start reading the copyright laws properly instead of what they have been doing.


Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2021, 04:32 »
+13
I think that's because there is a difference between selling photos with commercial licenses (featuring people or buildings) and publishing a video for free on a platform like Youtube.
Stock agencies need more restrictions to cover themselves legally when licensing photos. Most of what is published on YT is free for all and considered "fair use". Youtube does take down videos that violate copyright laws.


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2021, 08:45 »
+7
Here we go again

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2021, 10:02 »
+6

The stock companies have been misinterpreting copyright laws for a long time. Hopefully some day they will start reading the copyright laws properly instead of what they have been doing.
Hopefully, some day you will accept the benefits of having your own agency, raking in the profits from the highly desireable (you think) photos the agencies won't accept, while accepting the risk (which you don't believe exists). That would save you the effort and time of posting your hypotheses here, which is pointless.

Have fun.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2021, 15:18 by ShadySue »

« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2021, 13:45 »
+3
I think that's because there is a difference between selling photos with commercial licenses (featuring people or buildings) and publishing a video for free on a platform like Youtube.
Stock agencies need more restrictions to cover themselves legally when licensing photos. Most of what is published on YT is free for all and considered "fair use". Youtube does take down videos that violate copyright laws.

Nailed it.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #5 on: September 27, 2021, 07:40 »
+3


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
5520 Views
Last post July 19, 2012, 03:13
by ShadySue
17 Replies
19059 Views
Last post February 29, 2016, 07:34
by Wayman
8 Replies
4923 Views
Last post January 26, 2019, 11:57
by Noedelhap
39 Replies
9121 Views
Last post January 25, 2019, 17:31
by jjneff
4 Replies
2791 Views
Last post June 05, 2020, 07:40
by charged

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle