Author Topic: rights managed microstock (Read 24819 times)

jbarber873 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 28, 2011, 11:38 »

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 11:27

Quote from: gostwyck on January 28, 2011, 09:42
Quote from: jbarber873 on January 28, 2011, 08:30
... (snip) ... RM is the past, not the future.

Exactly. Images are now abundant in supply and their value (unless the image is truly exceptional) does not justify the additional administration for RM.

yes, unless it's a certain niche market in asia. and buyers just needs to tie the image to a specific usage when downloading.

The policing of RM images rights is difficult enough in an environment where there is widespread agreement on intellectual property rights. Trying to do so in Asia would be much more difficult. Microstock operates on a low cost model that precludes the costs associated with RM. As for a niche market, I think the example of "caucasian hands shaking" is a good one. But, that argues for you to supply the RF market ahead of the other 50,000 photographers who have the same idea. I don't believe those markets are right for RM, but they are indeed growing markets.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 28, 2011, 11:55 »

Quote from: jbarber873 on January 28, 2011, 11:38

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 11:27
Quote from: gostwyck on January 28, 2011, 09:42
Quote from: jbarber873 on January 28, 2011, 08:30
... (snip) ... RM is the past, not the future.

Exactly. Images are now abundant in supply and their value (unless the image is truly exceptional) does not justify the additional administration for RM.

yes, unless it's a certain niche market in asia. and buyers just needs to tie the image to a specific usage when downloading.

The policing of RM images rights is difficult enough in an environment where there is widespread agreement on intellectual property rights. Trying to do so in Asia would be much more difficult. Microstock operates on a low cost model that precludes the costs associated with RM. As for a niche market, I think the example of "caucasian hands shaking" is a good one. But, that argues for you to supply the RF market ahead of the other 50,000 photographers who have the same idea. I don't believe those markets are right for RM, but they are indeed growing markets.

in that case , can't i just set a policy where a RM image downloaded can be used only once ? without any additional agreements on intellectual property rights or whatsever.

ShadySue · « **Reply #27 on:** January 28, 2011, 12:02 »

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 11:55

in that case , can't i just set a policy where a RM image downloaded can be used only once ? without any additional agreements on intellectual property rights or whatsever.

How would you monitor this?
It's essentially unpoliceable.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #28 on:** January 28, 2011, 12:08 »

RM = Rights Managed = The ability to monitor each and every sales of a image. A buyer may not need full rights but he may want to know where or how many times an image is being used so that he can judge whether to use it himself. Or he may decide to pay for some level of exclusivity. All this cost money to administer and all this adds to the value of an image -whether or not the image is of higher or lower or exactly the same quality of anything currently in RF or micro.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #29 on:** January 28, 2011, 13:03 »

Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 12:08

RM = Rights Managed = The ability to monitor each and every sales of a image.

That's only true if an image has only ever been available exclusively at one agency, with a guarantee from the photographer that it has never been used previously.
Some RM agencies do regard image exclusivity for this reason, others don't.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #30 on:** January 28, 2011, 14:58 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 28, 2011, 13:03

Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 12:08
RM = Rights Managed = The ability to monitor each and every sales of a image.

That's only true if an image has only ever been available exclusively at one agency, with a guarantee from the photographer that it has never been used previously.
Some RM agencies do regard image exclusivity for this reason, others don't.

I understand your point and it is a little like trying define style. A perfect textbook definition is difficult. However without the essence of a Rights Managed image being somehow "managed" just makes it another RF image. Something needs to be managed, even if it's just price versus usage.

Stu49 · « **Reply #31 on:** January 28, 2011, 15:27 »

Quote from: cclapper on January 28, 2011, 11:22

Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 10:56
Micro RM is a oxymoron.

Exactly.

No it isn't !! Micro refers to size (or price), while RM is a licence type !?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #32 on:** January 28, 2011, 15:40 »

Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 14:58

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 28, 2011, 13:03
Something needs to be managed, even if it's just price versus usage.
That's what it is: they are controlling usage rights and fixing the price according to the required usage. Where the usage is very restricted, the price is generally lower than for RF. Where there are special privileges (sole rights in a territory) the price will be high.
Most RF licenses are bought with quite severe restrictions - there are time limits and the license may be for a use in single publication and in a single country. That's where the management comes in.

madelaide · « **Reply #33 on:** January 28, 2011, 15:43 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 28, 2011, 12:02

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 11:55

in that case , can't i just set a policy where a RM image downloaded can be used only once ? without any additional agreements on intellectual property rights or whatsever.
How would you monitor this?
It's essentially unpoliceable.

Exactly.

In the ideal world, we could license an image for one-time use paying cheap (and that's what micro should be for, IMHO), but in the real world you can not enforce it, so why have this clause?

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #34 on:** January 28, 2011, 16:17 »

Quote from: Stu49 on January 28, 2011, 15:27

Quote from: cclapper on January 28, 2011, 11:22
Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 10:56
Micro RM is a oxymoron.

Exactly.

No it isn't !! Micro refers to size (or price), while RM is a licence type !?

Micro is more than size or price, it is a license, or at least they try for there to be a license except that the images are often used in areas where they weren't licensed to. You can't have an RF/RM image anymore than you can have a micro RM image, it just doesn't make sense under the current marketing philosophy.

Karimala · « **Reply #35 on:** January 28, 2011, 16:52 »

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 07:19

Hi,

What do you guys think of rights managed images at microstock cost ?

I think it could work, but ONLY if your are managing the licenses yourself. You are free to manage your own images and license them to whomever you want with whatever contract you decide. If you know a buyer who can't afford Alamy's RM pricing, go ahead and negotiate your own lower price.

It would never work as an agency concept, because of the cost of administration. I mean, ask yourself...if you were iStock, would you be motivated to track down every usage on a RM image that only sold for a few bucks? That wouldn't be cost effective.

Karimala · « **Reply #36 on:** January 28, 2011, 16:53 »

Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 16:17

Quote from: Stu49 on January 28, 2011, 15:27
Quote from: cclapper on January 28, 2011, 11:22
Quote from: Zeus on January 28, 2011, 10:56
Micro RM is a oxymoron.

Exactly.

No it isn't !! Micro refers to size (or price), while RM is a licence type !?

Micro is more than size or price, it is a license, or at least they try for there to be a license except that the images are often used in areas where they weren't licensed to. You can't have an RF/RM image anymore than you can have a micro RM image, it just doesn't make sense under the current marketing philosophy.

That's incorrect. RF and RM are types of licenses. Micro and Macro are the payment methods.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #37 on:** January 28, 2011, 17:07 »

Quote from: Karimala on January 28, 2011, 16:53

That's incorrect. RF and RM are types of licenses. Micro and Macro are the payment methods.

Like you pay me 20 macros. Or I use my Micro card?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #38 on:** January 28, 2011, 17:28 »

Like macro > $100 and micro is less. Don't confuse licensing terms with pricing.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #39 on:** January 28, 2011, 20:46 »

Quote from: madelaide on January 28, 2011, 15:43

Quote from: ShadySue on January 28, 2011, 12:02
Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 11:55

in that case , can't i just set a policy where a RM image downloaded can be used only once ? without any additional agreements on intellectual property rights or whatsever.
How would you monitor this?
It's essentially unpoliceable.

Exactly.

In the ideal world, we could license an image for one-time use paying cheap (and that's what micro should be for, IMHO), but in the real world you can not enforce it, so why have this clause?

Quote from: Karimala on January 28, 2011, 16:52

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 28, 2011, 07:19
Hi,

What do you guys think of rights managed images at microstock cost ?

It would never work as an agency concept, because of the cost of administration. I mean, ask yourself...if you were iStock, would you be motivated to track down every usage on a RM image that only sold for a few bucks? That wouldn't be cost effective.

Well, obviously you can't. It's purely based on terms and agreements. I believe there are a lot of abuses in micros impressions usages too where ELs are not purchased. obviously no one can monitor all those. but hey, nothing is perfect ,the idea is to plant some trees instead of burning the entire forest. Not everyone is doing it but someone is

maybe i should come up with a new term if i want to start something like that.

"Limited Right managed" = This image can be used once per download only.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #40 on:** January 28, 2011, 20:51 »

Quote from: Karimala on January 28, 2011, 16:52

because of the cost of administration. I mean, ask yourself...if you were iStock, would you be motivated to track down every usage on a RM image that only sold for a few bucks? That wouldn't be cost effective.

At inmagine you can actually set the price of right managed photos where you can actually set it to 1 USD.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #41 on:** January 29, 2011, 04:05 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 28, 2011, 17:28

Like macro > $100 and micro is less.

I wish. My last RM sale was for $45, leaving me $27 in commission. Rather like a Shutterstock EL. I think that less than $100 is now quite normal for Alamy, seven of my last eight L (RM) sales there have been for less than $100. One was for $24 and only left about $11 after deductions.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: rights managed microstock (Read 24819 times)

jbarber873

yuliang11

ShadySue

PeterChigmaroff

BaldricksTrousers

PeterChigmaroff

Stu49

BaldricksTrousers

madelaide

PeterChigmaroff

Karimala

Karimala

PeterChigmaroff

Sean Locke Photography

yuliang11

yuliang11

BaldricksTrousers

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors