pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

Should Symbiostock have a UNIQUE license?

Yes - that would give Symbiostock a big advantage.
No - Too confusing. Adopt an existing one.

Author Topic: Symbiostock Needs its Own Licensing System  (Read 24601 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Leo Blanchette

« on: May 18, 2013, 14:41 »
0
See attached pole.

Symbiostock needs a few licenses to choose from, which can be applied to any image. To keep it simple, we will make a visual system.

Each image, above or below the product table, will have an icon or color signifying what license that image is under, and a link to that license which will point to either:

  • A dedicated page on that site.
  • A licensing page on Symbiostock.com.
  • A dedicated page on that site which also points to one on Symbiostock, to ensure consistency.

I will list License types below as people tell me. I understand there is some standard licenses out there as well available to the crowd?

Unique Symbiostock License:

Symbiostock needs its own unique license, derived from one of the models already out there, but personalized to Symbiostock. This license will ensure:

  • The content (that is, the individual images using the license) is exclusive to the owner's Symbiostock site. If its found to be otherwise, it defaults to a cheap royalty free license.
  • The license would add value to the customer's purchase and protect its use.
  • It would most likely NOT be royalty free, but a more valuable license to both customer and supplier.
  • Should be the sort of license that attracts big clients that want a unique work/artist. (Someone told me some organizations are restricted from using RF content.)

The existence of this unique license (which demands the product be exclusive to the SY owner's site) will give people reasons to search the network, knowing there is some hidden exclusive gems out there. It will also start to gradually get us out of Microstock dependence since it as a result will acquire its own audience. Its very important people have real reasons to take the time to browse theSymbiostock network. This license would be one of them.



I understand there are different types of systems out there RF, RM...I'm not extremely knowledgeable in this area. Please note them and I will list them here. Is there a place we can obtain default/standard verbiage? Please let me know. Is anyone actually able to prepare these for Symbiostock? Now is the time.

This licensing system, if people take it seriously, could be implemented by the time 2.0 is released, and it will look / function very well.



Symbiostock members as a group must:
  • Determine what is needed.
  • Determine a system for assigning licenses within website.
  • Acquire/Set up license(s)
  • Give stuff to Leo and tell him to implement it.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2013, 19:27 by Leo »


« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2013, 14:59 »
0
This is actually something I was thinking about the other day trying to find a licence that was neither royalty free not rights managed but something in between but even after doing research on the licences could not think of a way of doing it.  I came to the conclusion that the images would have to be unique to Symbiostock and not available on royalty free sites

« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2013, 15:47 »
0
there's not even a standard definition of RF, RM and editorial (or even exclusive!), so no std licenses.  I think best approach would be to have symbio come with some basic definition of those areas, and then let people customize them in the child theme

and RF doesn't necessarily have to mean cheaper - after all images sell on alamy for 10 - 100 times what they would on other agencies even when they're RF.  I know from experience on ebay and amazon that buyers often don't even do simple comparisons.

« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2013, 19:07 »
0
Again cascoly I agree with you: "RF doesn't have to mean cheaper" and absolutely agree with the first part of the post. We tend to consider "standard" license that aren't so. Other licenses can inspire us, but as cascoly stated best approach to me is to have some common rules and then in respect of these, everyone can customize.
Leo remember when I emailed you the questions for the interview? While I was writing, I thought the flexibility of selling directly; I also put a note, almost a motto in the bottom of the mail: Symbiostock! Buy from the copyright owner, highly personalized service, flexibility, fast support.
An example of flexibility. A customer needs an image for a project and doesn't want that the same image is used by a competitor. In all the agencies this is a real problem. But if we selling directly, we can say: the image has zero download, you can pay (more) and I deactivate the image you want six months.
So how this deal can fit in a general license?
I think that we need some guidelines but then the licenses will be customized by us according to the needs.
Mmmhh... maybe is it possible in a upcoming release to have the number of downloads visible close to the pictures? Maybe as an option to turn on/off ;D
« Last Edit: May 18, 2013, 19:09 by alberto »

Leo Blanchette

« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2013, 19:26 »
0
Thanks for the interest guys. I'm going to go out on a limb here and leave this completely to the SY community.

Symbiostock members as a group must:

1. Determine what is needed.
2. Determine a system for assigning licenses within website.
3. Acquire/Set up license(s)
4. Give stuff to Leo and tell him to implement it.

This is going to make life much easier for me. This is very important. I hope the interested people can make something happen. I'm updating original post with this...

« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2013, 19:48 »
+1
We aren't uninterested, but have thought about this, and decided that we prefer to do RF only on Sym.
The reason for this is - our experience on Photoshelter.
We have had no luck in selling RM, so have decided to leave that to the agencies who have experience and also customers.
We think the majority of our sales will come from Google and be individuals rather than companies, many of them don't even know what a licence is. RF keeps it simple.
The one thing that could change that is PicturEngine - will wait and see on that.

farbled

« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2013, 19:52 »
0
Gotta agree, although for me it's because I'm already selling or have sold my existing images as RF at other agencies. I don't think my work would generate much if anything as RM.

« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2013, 00:00 »
0
We aren't uninterested, but have thought about this, and decided that we prefer to do RF only on Sym.
The reason for this is - our experience on Photoshelter.
We have had no luck in selling RM, so have decided to leave that to the agencies who have experience and also customers.
We think the majority of our sales will come from Google and be individuals rather than companies, many of them don't even know what a licence is. RF keeps it simple.
The one thing that could change that is PicturEngine - will wait and see on that.

exactly -- that's why I make my version of royalty free pretty liberal, and don't even mention RM -- those who want it have emailed me & we've worked it out case by case.

« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2013, 04:11 »
0
I would be quite happy to include a hybrid type licence

If a client is willing to pay xxx I will remove it from sale for x weeks/months/years
If they want to use it for more than x number of sales they pay extra
If they want to use it for z they pay the fee shown

I am planning to try and  have a lot of my images only selling via my own site which will make this easier than if they are listed everywhere and competing against each other, and ultimately I think it might lead to Symbiostock's success ?

« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2013, 12:54 »
0
I would be quite happy to include a hybrid type licence

If a client is willing to pay xxx I will remove it from sale for x weeks/months/years
If they want to use it for more than x number of sales they pay extra
If they want to use it for z they pay the fee shown

I am planning to try and  have a lot of my images only selling via my own site which will make this easier than if they are listed everywhere and competing against each other, and ultimately I think it might lead to Symbiostock's success ?

And this need some effort, a license for those things can't fit easily the needs of all. I'm thinking about the license and I'm not sure how to set up the things. I think that sort of chance must be clear for customer; they must know that they buy from the copyright owner that can help them to get what they want. People must know because for them is better a network curate by author instead of agency, so maybe we need not only a license but more messages to make clear this things.
As cascoly said a liberal license with (I would add) some paragraphs that stated these possibility through negotiation is better than a rigid(?) license.

« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2013, 16:38 »
0
I'd be happy with just "RF standard" (limited use) and "RF Extented" (unlimited use) IF I can easily

- define different price levels (e.g. for SY exclusive content, hi-res (60MP+) panoramas, etc.)
- define usage limitations for certain groups of images without model/property releases, that contain logos, artworks, etc... (not sure if marking them "editorial" will be enough to differentiate.

In either of these cases I'd like to have customizable text on image pages that inform buyers on those limitations/differentiations of the "RF standard"/"RF Extented" licenses. This text could also include an invitation to negotiate special demand deals.

RM licensing, as good as it may sound from the seller's perspective, is problematic because it can be confusing for buyers (and sellers) that are not familiar with the concept. It also comes with some overhead of, well, right management and consequently policing that I'd rather like to avoid.

« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2013, 07:58 »
0
I'd be happy with just "RF standard" (limited use) and "RF Extented" (unlimited use) ...
I agree ... this is exactly what I intend to use.

« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2013, 10:22 »
+1
I have edited my EULA (again) and removed all mention of royalty free - constructive comments would be appreciated

~~

End User License Agreement
Stockimages.Kerioak.com Stock Image End User Licence Agreement
It is the intention of  Christine Nichols of stockimages.kerioak.com that these conditions shall be in plain English and users of this site agree, by using the site, that the spirit as well as the wording shall be taken into account.
The following is an agreement between you (licensee) and Christine Nichols of stockimages.kerioak.com (copyright owner of image) and you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this agreement which may change without notice and you agree to be bound by such changes.  By using this site for any purpose you agree to be bound by these terms and conditions
1 Definitions:
Symbiostock: Linked community of individual copyright holders making their images available through their own sites
You, Licensee, End User:  person or entity licensing image
Me, My, Us,  I, We, Our, Artist :  Christine Nichols of stockimages.kerioak.com - Copyright owner who confirms that the work offered for sale is solely their own work and owned and created by them.
Copyright:  Intellectual Property right owned by the photographer/designer/artist of photographs, pictures, drawings, designs, vectors,
Image:  Photograph, vector, illustration, drawing, painting, brush set,  any licensable item
2 Licence Terms
Standard Licence
On receiving full payment for specific high resolution image(s) I grant the End User a perpetual, non-exclusive, non-transferable worldwide licence to use the image in the following ways:

 Advertising and promotional material, flyers and brochures up to print run limit of 100,000 copies
 Book editorial content or cover
 Single fine art print,
 Electronic media, website-maximum dimension of 800 pixels on longest side
This list is not exhaustive, see restrictions below or if you have any queries contact Copyright holder
Extended or Special Licences

Extended licences are required for re-print and sale on demand items such as calendars, mugs, clothing, greeting cards (online or print), multiple fine art prints and print runs over 100,001 items.  Contact Copyright holder for fees.  Restrictions as below will apply
Licencing Exclusive Rights to the Image for a limited period
On receiving full payment (price to be agreed) for specific high resolution image(s) the copyright holder agrees to exclusively licence the rights of said image(s) and remove it from sale anywhere else it may appear, within 96 hours.  This image may have previously been licensed and be in use elsewhere, and there may be similar images shot at the same time which will remain available
Restrictions as below will apply
Editorial Images

Images marked as Editorial in the description will have no copyright or intellectual property releases and may contain copyrighted material or trademarks. The End User is responsible for seeking legal counsel for use of the image(s). The End User accepts responsibility for all liabilities that may arise from use of the image(s).
3 Restrictions

The Licensee/End User agrees that:
Images will have copyright details retained with the image credited whenever possible this includes without exception all web use, book and editorial using one of the following formats
Christine Nichols, stockimages.kerioak.com
Kerioak, stockimages.kerioak.com
Christine Nichols, Kerioak.com
www.stockimages.kerioak.com
 
Images will not be used for sensitive topics without my prior written agreement.  These include (but are not limited to):
 Models with mental or physical health issues,
 Sexual orientation or sexually related
 Substance abuse
 Criminal offences
 Political endorsements,
 Subjects that could be considered offensive, demeaning or unflattering.
 If you have any queries  contact Copyright holder
Image may not be used as trademark, service mark or logo unless copyright release is purchased

Copyright remains with me even if the licenced image is incorporated into other images or media.
Images will not be sub-licensed, assigned, transferred, given away, made available via on-line or other database, this includes facebook, flickr and similar sharing sites

The exception to this is if you have licensed the image for a client (e.g. website, advertising) when you must keep detailed records and make them available to the Copyright holder if requested.  This is only likely to be required should an IP query arise.  You may use the licensed image for one client.  Should you wish to use the same image for another client you must licence it again.
Once you have completed payment for the license to use the Image, you are granted a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to use and reproduce the image in printed materials, or any electronic or digital form.  In the latter case, each image should be incorporated into a design in such a manner to make it clear that the image is not intended to be separately downloaded, copied, or distributed and the image size in use must less than 800 pixels on the longest side.
 
Non-transferable means that the work you produce using a licensed Image must be for your own use, or if purchased on behalf of your employer or client, your employer or client must be the end-user of your work. You may not sell, rent, loan, give, sublicense, or otherwise transfer to anyone the Image, or the right to use an Image, and nothing you produce shall grant or purport to grant to any third party a right to use or duplicate an Image. You agree to take all commercially reasonable steps to prevent third parties from duplicating or distributing the Image.

4. Intellectual Property, Liability and Indemnify Limitation
You shall indemnify and defend the photographer against all claims, liability, damages, costs and expenses, including reasonable legal fees and expenses, arising out of or related to (a) a breach of this Agreement, (b) the use or modification of any Image or combination of any Image with any other material, (d) your failure to abide by any restriction regarding the use of an Image, or (e) any claim by a third party related to the use of an Image, alone or in combination with any other material. The photographer warrants ownership of the copyright for the Image.
By using this site you understand that you take responsibility and assume all risk without limitation.
Stockimages.kerioak.com do not bear any responsibility for any shut-down of the site resulting in loss of profit, business information or any other financial losses regardless of whether it is due to navigation, technical, infringement, negligence, contract liabilities or other similar cases or situations or not.
By using this site you agree to indemnify and hold Christine Nichols and Stockimages.kerioak.com harmless from and against all claims, losses, damages, liability, costs, expenses incurred
Stockimages.kerioak.com have done their best to ensure that there are no Intellectual Property infringements within their images available to licence and permission from recognisable models will have been obtained, with the exception of those images marked as Editorial.  It is however the licensees responsibility to ensure that the image(s) they download are fit for the purpose to which you wish to put them.
5. Applicable Law
This site is owned, managed and controlled by http://stockimages.kerioak.com located in England. The site is available worldwide and as each country may have different laws and acts the End User agrees that these Terms of Use are governed by the English Law and also agrees that any disputes arising which may be deemed wholly or partially unenforceable and cannot be settled by voluntary negotiation will be dealt with by the Judicial process in England.


Pinocchio

« Reply #13 on: May 20, 2013, 10:32 »
0
there's not even a standard definition of RF, RM and editorial (or even exclusive!), so no std licenses.  I think best approach would be to have symbio come with some basic definition of those areas, and then let people customize them in the child theme

and RF doesn't necessarily have to mean cheaper - after all images sell on alamy for 10 - 100 times what they would on other agencies even when they're RF.  I know from experience on ebay and amazon that buyers often don't even do simple comparisons.

Even though there are no standard licenses, there is a significant effort to standardise the terms that make up a license and make licenses machine-readable.

More information starting here https://www.useplus.com/aboutplus/system.asp - but there's a lot to read....

As far as I can tell, the material at this link makes no mention of either RF or RM.  I recently saw a comment by Jeff Sedlik, the fellow leading the PLUS effort, this is because PLUS took an agnostic approach - they are trying to support all styles of licensing.

I have read on the IPTC web site that they enhanced the IPTC metadata to include the information the PLUS approach requires (IPTC did that some time ago).  I also believe that PhotoShop CS6 now supports the enhanced IPTC metadata; I am still running CS4, so can't confirm.

Perhaps this offers a basis for constructing one or more licenses?

Regards

« Reply #14 on: May 20, 2013, 10:56 »
0
That looks as if it would be very, very complicated to incorporate - it is bad enough just trying to get though one section and I admit, if I was trying to purchase a single small image I would give up on it very quickly with all the permutations that are involved

farbled

« Reply #15 on: May 20, 2013, 11:12 »
+1
I like your license Christine, can I edit it and use it on mine? :)

« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2013, 03:25 »
+1
I like your license Christine, can I edit it and use it on mine? :)

Yes, put it in your own words though :)  I am not a solicitor so have no idea how legal it is, I just put it forward as a reply to Leo's original question to see what others thought.  I also changed my FAQ's and front page to remove any mention of royalty free

Leo Blanchette

« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2013, 03:34 »
0
I'm glad you guys are (maybe?) headed toward a group decision on this. Whats the general opinion leaning toward? I've left this to the good ol' Symbiostock community to figure out :D

« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2013, 04:29 »
0
I like the license I am using right now..

My content is not photos or regular vectors.. it requires a unique license "which I currently have" and I won't and don't want to use anything else to be honest..

« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2013, 05:13 »
0
I don't think we are going to be able to agree to have one licence across all the sites which in a way is a shame as it means that clients licensing images from more than one of us have to agree to different terms in different places.

Maybe Cidepix's would make a good staring point but with the option to add different options for those of us who are willing to charge more and let clients use the images for different purposes such as calendars or exclusive use for a certain period of time.

If we could create a licence that is the same for everyone but we can pick and choose which clauses to use would that be of benefit to the network?

I think the answer to Leo's question is that we will all agree to go our own separate ways regarding licences ? :)


« Reply #20 on: May 21, 2013, 13:51 »
+2
I don't think it's that big of a disadvantage as most computer users never read ANYTHING they agree to on the internet

Leo Blanchette

« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2013, 14:49 »
0
Well interestingly it does not appear that a central licensing system can be agreed on...the whole point of this project is freedom of choices in how you do things. What I will do is make some optional licenses (at some point) with people's help. It will have to be someone who specializes in this area. @Tinny - great job on what you have there. With a little more consideration that might possibly be adopted!

Gonna lock the thread - hopefully someone in the business who is versed in licensing will see this and offer some help.   ;)

Over and out!

« Reply #22 on: August 01, 2013, 06:12 »
0
es a new type of licensing is good but how to control usage in any case ?

1. RF: unfortunately buyers are used to pay cheap for it and they can use the picture as much as they want. It will be difficult to have a RF model more expensive on Symbiostock while agencies sell at lower prices.

2. RM: it's the perfect model but it needs control and a service to enforce the good usage of pictures. Typically, the image has to be used in a specific format, for a specific time frame, in a specific region, for a specific quantity. etc... The buyer has to respect the limits of usage. As we know, we can't trust all buyers, so there is a need for checking, controlling and enforcing if necessary (that is make copyright  infringer pay for their abuse willingly or through litigation). It's a hard job. Even big agencies like Corbis or Getty have a tough time with that and they have the means.

3. An hybrid model where usage wouldn't be as free as RF and not as complicated to manage as RM. The goal is to have decent prices for artists and an incentive for buyers at the same time.

The fair trade concept as opposed to blatant exploitation by microstock agencies is already an incentive fro some buyers.
Buying directly from the artist is another one.
Some service has to be proposed to the buyer.Something that will make her/him change from "traditional"agencies to a Symbiostock model.
What is the unique value proposition of Symbiostock ?
Why would I as a buyer change for another provider ?


« Reply #23 on: September 23, 2013, 15:26 »
0
I would love to see a 'Rights Managed License' option...even if it is just another license option we select to activate on a per image basis. I have some images that have never been offered as Royalty Free that I'm not particularly eager to offer that way. I want to know where they end up and how they're used. Offering them as Rights Managed would be a way to do that, plus possibly be able to leverage additional revenue from them.


Ron

« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2013, 16:18 »
0
The RM option is there !!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
5360 Views
Last post December 08, 2007, 19:48
by stokfoto
Extended Licensing?

Started by traveler1116 Cutcaster

9 Replies
4243 Views
Last post November 04, 2008, 19:42
by johngriffin
9 Replies
3673 Views
Last post November 30, 2008, 13:51
by Elenathewise
4 Replies
3492 Views
Last post January 03, 2010, 20:18
by icefront
3 Replies
1896 Views
Last post August 01, 2013, 07:10
by cathyslife

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle