Author Topic: Istock sells my editorial images with an extended license 'products for resale' (Read 6935 times)

Luuk · « **on:** April 18, 2016, 05:58 »

I took a look at my extended licenses at istock and saw that one of my editorial images with cars on it (with visible license numbers, special cars during a car event) was sold with an extended license 'products for resale'.

How can this happen? I sometimes upload images with cars, people (city views with people on it), etc, but strict under an editorial license, so that they will not be used commercially.

Products for resale sounds pretty commercial to me...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** April 18, 2016, 06:12 »

Could be a coffee table book, or something like that.

Luuk · « **Reply #2 on:** April 18, 2016, 06:19 »

That makes more sense, thank you! Hadn't thought about use in those ways

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #3 on:** April 18, 2016, 10:18 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 18, 2016, 06:12

Could be a coffee table book, or something like that.

But surely you don't need an extended license for a book? Unless it's a print run related issue. Products for resale clause from license:

"No Products for Resale. Unless you purchase an extended license, you may not use content in connection with any goods or services intended for resale or distribution where the primary value lies in the content itself including, without limitation, cards, stationery items, paper products, calendars, apparel items, posters (printed on paper, canvas, or any other media), CDs, DVDs, mobile applications or other items for resale, license or other distribution for profit. This includes "on demand" products (meaning products in which content is selected by a third party for customization on such product on a made-to-order basis), including, without limitation, postcards, mugs, t-shirts, posters and other items"

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #4 on:** April 18, 2016, 10:22 »

Well, a coffee table photography book would have the primary value lying in the photographs within.

ShadySue · « **Reply #5 on:** April 18, 2016, 11:36 »

When they introduced editorial at first, I was pretty worried about the possibility of ELs. All ELs seem to be allowed. I wrote to CR and got the reply that it was to allow e.g. charities to make tshirts.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #6 on:** April 18, 2016, 12:41 »

Quote from: ShadySue on April 18, 2016, 11:36

When they introduced editorial at first, I was pretty worried about the possibility of ELs. All ELs seem to be allowed. I wrote to CR and got the reply that it was to allow e.g. charities to make tshirts.

Uh, I'm not quite sure that's an editorial use. That's still a company making money, whether it's a "charity" or not.

ShadySue · « **Reply #7 on:** April 18, 2016, 12:54 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 18, 2016, 12:41

Quote from: ShadySue on April 18, 2016, 11:36
When they introduced editorial at first, I was pretty worried about the possibility of ELs. All ELs seem to be allowed. I wrote to CR and got the reply that it was to allow e.g. charities to make tshirts.

Uh, I'm not quite sure that's an editorial use. That's still a company making money, whether it's a "charity" or not.

I'm only passing on what they said.

If the OP is concerned, they could contact CR directly.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #8 on:** April 18, 2016, 13:35 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 18, 2016, 12:41

Quote from: ShadySue on April 18, 2016, 11:36
When they introduced editorial at first, I was pretty worried about the possibility of ELs. All ELs seem to be allowed. I wrote to CR and got the reply that it was to allow e.g. charities to make tshirts.

Uh, I'm not quite sure that's an editorial use. That's still a company making money, whether it's a "charity" or not.

charity... non-profit org...
are the new world scam. the 20 % or even 10% actually goes into charity or aid,
the 80% goes into salary of the administrators.

yes, the only charity is towards the people who started this noble organization;
not like Mother Teresa and her nuns.

Luuk · « **Reply #9 on:** April 18, 2016, 13:39 »

reading the answers, I will send a message to CR, maybe it is ok, but if not, I will delete my editorials on iStock to make sure I will not get into trouble.

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** April 18, 2016, 13:56 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on April 18, 2016, 13:35

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on April 18, 2016, 12:41
Quote from: ShadySue on April 18, 2016, 11:36
When they introduced editorial at first, I was pretty worried about the possibility of ELs. All ELs seem to be allowed. I wrote to CR and got the reply that it was to allow e.g. charities to make tshirts.

Uh, I'm not quite sure that's an editorial use. That's still a company making money, whether it's a "charity" or not.

charity... non-profit org...
are the new world scam. the 20 % or even 10% actually goes into charity or aid,
the 80% goes into salary of the administrators.

yes, the only charity is towards the people who started this noble organization;
not like Mother Teresa and her nuns.

That may be the case where you come from, but not everywhere.
Here to be registered as a charity, a high percentage of their money must go to the charitable work, and the percentage must be audited and published. Some of the smaller ones are 100% run by volunteers, though it's now very difficult for a small group to be registered, the legal hoops to jump through are many and high.

That said, use by a charity is not necessarily editorial.

This is the exact reply I got from CR (March 2011)
"Thank you for contacting us. I've confirmed that these EL options are accurate and are being offered with Editorial files. The reason for this is, there are a number of uses where an EL may need to be purchased when a file is used for Editorial purposes. An example of this would be, if a charity or cause were holding a rally and everyone were to get a t-shirt, postcard, or some sort of product to hold, wear, or post an editorial picture may be used and because of the number of items they're printing, they would need to purchase an EL. Another case might be for a charity or cause sends out an email to its members including one of our images (which is used in an editorial manner) but their email list exceeds our limits, they would need to purchase an EL.
We're not giving customers permission to use them in a commercial manner, the file must still only be used for Editorial purposes, but there are cases where that editorial use will require an EL."

NB, don't shoot the messenger.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #11 on:** April 18, 2016, 14:11 »

That's even weirder. That would be s normal promotional use if you give it away. Charity or not,

Red On · « **Reply #12 on:** April 21, 2016, 12:34 »

In my life as a photo-reporter, I sold some time editorials as extended license and perfectly legal: the buyer was the owner of the brand with full right to use the images. Could be your case too

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Istock sells my editorial images with an extended license 'products for resale' (Read 6935 times)

Luuk

Sean Locke Photography

Luuk

Jo Ann Snover

Sean Locke Photography

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

ShadySue

etudiante_rapide

Luuk

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

Red On

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors