3
« on: November 14, 2014, 04:15 »
Last night I received an email from Shutterstock saying a prospective buyer wanted to licence for commercial use a video which I had marked as editorial only. The customer would be aware that they had to obtain any necessary releases and I, as the contributor, could give this permission 'at no risk to you'. The email had a link to an online form for me to complete.
I enquired further about the background to this. The clip concerned was of a Virgin Trains Pendolino leaving a station in NW England, with no visible people. I could have possibly have considered agreeing to the purchaser being given permission to seek out the necessary clearances to use this particular clip as the releases needed were fairly clear (Virgin for the train, Network Rail for the station).
However, the on-line form didn't relate to just this clip, but gave Shutterstock permission to sell for commercial use ANY of my editorial stock to ANY customer without further reference to me, providing the customer was clear that they had to obtain any necessary releases first. This seemed to me to open a great big can of worms. Not least is the question of whether Shutterstock's assurance that there would be 'no risk to you' in giving such permission would stand up. I've come across stories of photographers being sued for their image wrongly being used commercially, even when the photog had no control over that usage.
I declined Shutterstock's request, being more concerned about my long term peace-of-mind than making a $50 clip sale.
Has anybody else come across this kind of request from Shutterstock and am I being unduly cautious?