Author Topic: 60 watermarked images (Read 5383 times)

ShadySue · « **on:** March 30, 2011, 04:48 »

I make no comment on the premise of the site, just that the 60 images are watermarked with a large variety of stock libraries from Getty to thinkstock.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/60-completely-unusable-stock-photos
(Very first photo: I remember way back when I was a student seeing a poster campaign featuring a 'pregnant man' with the slogan, "If you could get pregnant, you'd use contraception' or similar.)

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #1 on:** March 30, 2011, 05:39 »

Yup, they should be paying for the licenses. The people who shot those things surely deserve some sort of return from them

michealo · « **Reply #2 on:** March 30, 2011, 06:21 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 30, 2011, 05:39

Yup, they should be paying for the licenses. The people who shot those things surely deserve some sort of return from them

There is at least one in Vetta & it it has sold > 10 times

jm · « **Reply #3 on:** March 30, 2011, 06:28 »

All of them would be sold at least once - if Mr. Buzzfeed would pay for them. $:-\$

Xalanx · « **Reply #4 on:** March 30, 2011, 07:26 »

The one with the chocolate and the woman wrapped in tinfoil is absolutely great.
Also, a lot others of those images can have a use.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #5 on:** March 30, 2011, 09:46 »

Quote from: michealo on March 30, 2011, 06:21

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on March 30, 2011, 05:39
Yup, they should be paying for the licenses. The people who shot those things surely deserve some sort of return from them

There is at least one in Vetta & it it has sold > 10 times

But we don't know if it sold >10 times as Vetta or if some or all the sales were from before. I always have a clear idea of at least some ways in which my work might be useful before uploading it and with a couple of exceptions I find it hard to think of uses for that 60. I guess it makes some sense to have the bizarre on agencies like Getty, where a single sale might justify the production effort.

Fred · « **Reply #6 on:** March 30, 2011, 09:51 »

Hmmmmmmm Unusable or not they have used them all and now they need to pay for them.

fred

mantonino · « **Reply #7 on:** March 30, 2011, 12:40 »

What if they just want to educate us and then could claim educational fair use?

:-)

(btw. this is a joke. I know I have to clarify sometimes.)

gostwyck · « **Reply #8 on:** March 30, 2011, 13:04 »

Quote from: Fred on March 30, 2011, 09:51

Hmmmmmmm Unusable or not they have used them all and now they need to pay for them.

fred

If they'd have linked the images back to their source (which they have not done so) could they have justifiably claimed that they were advertising or promoting the images?

Blufish · « **Reply #9 on:** March 30, 2011, 13:22 »

Didn't this happen about 6 or 9 months ago? I swear I've seen this here before

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 60 watermarked images (Read 5383 times)

ShadySue

BaldricksTrousers

michealo

jm

Xalanx

BaldricksTrousers

Fred

mantonino

gostwyck

Blufish

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors