My september was pretty normal in PP sales. Only October was way better than other months.

When you say October, do you mean September or November ?

Personally - recently and from now on I am buying used from eBay. When a new model comes out I might buy a recent previous if I really need a new body. Always from private sellers with good feedback, never from dealers.

This is what I have learned: there are lots of people out there who are basically fetishistic about cameras. These people are way more into cameras than they are into photographs - they buy the latest thing no matter how much it costs. They are like the people who like hi-fi but have little interest in music. 12-18 months later the camera is still great but worth about 1/3 or less used. And often these people keep the equipment in very good condition - though I am happy to buy scratched bodies.

I can clean a sensor and I am not going to buy anything with too many shutter activations. At this point I am only using prime lenses and I have most of the lenses I am ever likely to need.

FWIW - I long ago came to the conclusion that APS-C sized sensors max out at about 12 MP and 35mm sized sensors are good up to about 24 MP. I tend to downsize images from cameras which exceed this and very few clients actually need anything bigger than 6 MP.

You missed out the zero option ! Most people in the world have never visited the USA.

What else can I be infringing on?

The paint job.

This kind of thing wants to be editorial.

LOL. So whats the cinema crowd in Ireland like? Or how about the Dutch theatres?

The last mainstream movie I watched in Dublin was Lemony Snicket. So that would have been about 10 years ago. I don't tend to go to the cinema in Dublin. And the last movie I saw in the Netherlands would have been Total Recall (the original), a very long time ago.

Some places treat cinema like art and the audiences behave. And obviously most cities also have independent cinemas which tend to attract more respectful audiences - but those places don't tend to show current movies.

We went to see it the other night. Really enjoyed it. My favourite part: his slight misunderstanding and re-imagining of the plot of Benjamin Button.

The big prize snatched away at the last minute is a typical meme - if only I had done this etc.

With that in mind - a number of aspects here do not quite ring right IMO and make me wonder whether this story is friend-of-a-friend or apocryphal - perhaps originating with someone who instinctively does not like RF:

Firstly - that the ad agency would not have immediately checked the image for previous usages*. Agencies here in France, the same as everywhere else, know all about RF and are not stupid. And I cannot see that it would have made a substantial difference if the image had been costing them $1 or $x00 - vs the nearly $10k which this story is supposed to be all about.

Secondly - the idea that Auchan / Carrefour / Leclerc would be using the same generic food images to advertise a supplier's product. If it was a specific product then the producer would be supplying their own pictures. If it were a generic food item (lets say apples, or tomatoes) then it does not seem likely that 3 rival supermarkets would be using a single agency to supply the content.

Thirdly - if it were a generic item (perhaps for use as a design element within some composition) then there is no possibility that the agency would pay so  much.

* unless the photographer was asked and did not give the full information

If you read my last post correctly you will see that I am simply asking if I should let the people who are selling the poster get on with their business because there is no point in stopping them earn a living.

Them stopping selling the poster almost certainly had nothing anything to do with you contacting them.

It costs money to list items for sale - that means losing money if the poster is not selling. The movie is no longer current and it is very unlikely that anyone wants a poster. Also IIRC that poster was for the short British release only.

You go first second.

OK: I think Symbiostock has the potential to be one of the biggest stories in 2014. I am not part of it but can see that it is a big achievement already. I could definitely see groups emerging from within it and forming their own mini-agencies whilst still being in some ways part of the wider project as a whole. I would expect to see some big 'players' joining which should give it a boost. Maybe even subscriptions. It needs to be a much more unified customer experience like an agency - but I have no doubt that will gradually happen and especially within smaller groups.

Personally - Alamy RM and Airbnb is becoming a big part of my life. And much smaller cameras - since I like to be able to travel with only carry-on luggage.

My graph is totally different to yours:

My graph is different to yours, but the ups and downs of the blue bits are similar:

... incidentally I think it is quite normal to assign uncertain rights - for example an assignment transfer document will sometimes include wording about "such rights as may exist" or similar.

A new home owner being upset at funding his home in an ad is not analagous to your examples, as his knowledge of the previous release was not a condition of the sale.

From the iStock PR which is typical:

I acknowledge and agree that this release is binding upon my heirs if applicable, assigns or any person claiming an interest in the Property. I agree that this release is irrevocable, worldwide and perpetual,

ASSIGNS, contracts. Those to whom rights have been transmitted by particular title, such as sale, gift, legacy, transfer, or cession.

- http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Assigns

Bottom line, unless the property release is registered against the property in a legal fashion or the new buyer signs a legal acknowledgment and acceptance of the existing PR when they buy the property, then nothing is binding on the new buyer and your PR becomes worthless as soon as that property changes hands, regardless of what the previous owner might have agreed to in an informal unregistered agreement with a  photographer. In a legal dispute all the new owner would have to say is they were never made aware of the agreement nor did they accept the liability of the PR against the property and they have won the battle.

This is why you are ultimately wrong:

In most countries there is most likely already no legal requirement for a property release anyhow. So this is already belt and braces stuff which would simply provide a further degree of protection (against already rare bother). This probably mostly tends to have more to do with best practice than law.

Anyhow - this has nothing to do with a new buyers. Just the same as they would have no claim over the use of a photograph of the interior of their house taken, say, 100 years ago.