Quote from: molka on October 08, 2010, 07:38

The same image as RF and RM might end you up in a lawsuite

No. That depends on what exactly the RM licence says. Alamy's RM licence (at least their "L" licence) does not include any exclusivity terms and no need to provide any image usage history.

The Alamy contract states quite clearly that if you submitted a file as RF to another agency, you may not have it on Alamy as RM:

"2.2 You cannot submit identical or similar images to Alamy as both Royalty-Free and Rights Managed. The licence type on Alamy for an image must be the same as the licence type for that image and similar images which you have on other agency websites. "

http://www.alamy.com/contributor/contract/default.asp

Quote from: RacePhoto on October 10, 2010, 16:20

L on Alamy is RM with a different name.

There is no RF or RM.  What there is, is an infinite number of people and agencies who have the individual terms they license content under.  In general, "RF" has come to be known as a set of terms that include perpetual and wide ranging permissions.  "RM" has come to be known as a set of tighter, more restrictive set of permissions.

If you need a narrowly defined set of permissions only, an smaller defined set of permissions will likely save you money ($15 for a one time 1/4 page use in a 5,000 circulation magazine).  If you need exclusivity, you would need to pay for a service that has a tracked history of permissions granted.  If you need perpetual, wide ranging permissions, the typical "RF" license might save you money.  It all is just shopping for what you need at a place that offers it.

Sounds good and I noticed with data supplied the only thing I was told was the type of publication, print run, size and usage, with L and I was never asked to restrict usage. If it was a managed RM (hey the word managed) then I'd understand. I can sell the same image more times, but for some reason it's called Rights Managed. It's not exclusive not.

If I'm reading the micro sites right, their RF varies from one time usage to one year to forever! Kind of strange and no restrictions on the artist who may sell/license the same image over and over.

But the point is that at least two people have claimed here that Alamy L or some other form of their license, does not conflict with RF, when everything else says it does. And when we have asked for an explanation, we just get some redundant rubbish about how it's not again the rules or some comment about a license type that doesn't even exist as far as I can tell?

Which does not preclude you from removing it RF on other agencies and listing it L on Alamy.  Just that you can't do it at the same time (which most people think is a silly idea anyways).