Ed Rooney

Personal Use?

141 posts in this topic

I just had another sale of a photo of box of medicational tablets as 'personal use'. I guess they think they are buying the actual tablets.

What sort of idiot would buy serious medications at what is apparently a very low price from a website they know nothing about?

Another refund awaited.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Editorial only, of course! But we must also click No PU. 

 

I expressed the same thought, Bryan: why would artists have a problem with free publicity? I think it's PU they have a real problem with. I'm going to let my thinking settle in before making any changes. 

 

Also, tourists often photograph street murals and then make prints for themselves or to give to others. If you paint something on a wall where everyone can see it, then this is bound to happen.

 

I guess it's the idea of someone (Alamy and us) making money indirectly from their work that really sticks in the artists' craws, which is understandable.

 

Again, more proof that PU and stock photography agencies make strange bedfellows.

Edited by John Mitchell
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just had another sale of a photo of box of medicational tablets as 'personal use'. I guess they think they are buying the actual tablets.

What sort of idiot would buy serious medications at what is apparently a very low price from a website they know nothing about?

Another refund awaited.

 

 

Maybe the buyer will OD on your snap?

 

Yeah, John -- we are in the Twilight Zone of imaging.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I should put in the description field that this is a photo not a box of tablets.

To be fair, maybe the buyers (that's two now) weren't total eejits. Maybe someone is really ill but can't afford meds in their country, and has very little to lose by taking possibly dodgy drugs. That would explain why the first one, and no doubt the second, would ask for refunds. If I'd done anything that stupid, I'd be too embarrassed to ask for a refund.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting issue here re street art - I believe in many countries it remains illegal to decorate the street or walls

Not that two wrongs make a right - but would be an interesting legal matter

 

Martin

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about removing the location for artworks where it's not relevant to make them harder for artists' lawyers to find. GIS isn't that good at finding images unless they're identical, so including a bit of background will throw it off anyway.

On the wider legal point, they're always going to be at risk in the US because suing is a participant sport, but the only danger point I can think of in Europe is France where I believe right of panorama is restricted. Anyone trying it in the UK, where there's a specific exemption, is toying with restraint of trade. CDPA s.62.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On the wider legal point, they're always going to be at risk in the US because suing is a participant sport, but the only danger point I can think of in Europe is France where I believe right of panorama is restricted. Anyone trying it in the UK, where there's a specific exemption, is toying with restraint of trade. CDPA s.62.

 

Alamy have added this interesting clause in the recent amendments to the contributor contract:

 

'The Image complies with the privacy and property laws of the country in which it was taken, e.g. in certain countries before taking a photo of someone you are required by law to ask the subject’s permission.'

Edited by Thyrsis
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUESTION: When you make changes under Alamy Image Manager > Optional > Restrictions > Don't sell for personal use.... There is a small calendar to the right of this > "Add end date" - What does this mean? Do you have to specify how low long you want restrictions to last? Confusing.

Also, Restrictions can only be applied to RM images not RF, correct?

Thanks.

Edited by Wawa
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

In fact most of my collection is RM, Don. I recently changed all my tabletop food shots to RF, and at Alamy's suggestion, more recently, I've tried using RF on other things. That's why you see them on the most recent pages.

 

Except for anonymous food, I don't feel RF is going to work for me, especially with this PU problem. However, I don't want to be changing directions every other week.  

 

 

You're right, Edo, I didn't scroll down far enough to see that only a few are RF.

 

At this point I do not block PU sales because, unlike many of the rest of you with larger collections, I have yet to experience abuses of it (or any PU sales at all, for that matter). However, remaining open to distributor sales was not the reason. As this is April, I took the opportunity to opt out of that plan.

 

One primary reason for this is that, during the couple years that I've been getting sales on Alamy, the amounts received through distributors have been declining considerably while the amounts received from direct Alamy sales have exceeded my expectations. No doubt I'll lose some income by opting out of distribution, but not enough to override the feelings I have when, for recent example, an image is sold to a restaurant for a display print for 10 bucks and my cut was just three. I doubt that Alamy's own sales staff would have made that deal.

 

Also, I've noticed that a certain German magazine buys a lot of Alamy images through one highfalutin German agency (HGA), compared to relatively few from HGA's own collection. HGA is quite picky in what they accept and maintain high prices, but they are no doubt happy to let Alamy do all the work of maintaining the image files so they can sit back and collect 40% for doing little more than the act of collecting.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stick with distributors partly because I have a biggish German collection and German buyers usually go through one. The prices are quite fair comparatively these days even at 30%.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stick with distributors partly because I have a biggish German collection and German buyers usually go through one. The prices are quite fair comparatively these days even at 30%.

 

As a resident of Germany, photos of this country form a large part of my collection also. Perhaps next April I'll decide that it was a mistake and correct it.

 

One might hope that at some point they'll realize that Alamy is the Alice's Restaurant of stock and they can get anything they want here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe try to submit direct to Mauritius, which often seems to come up?

Of course they'll then put your port on Alamy and Alamy will be the distributor instead. Sigh.bt

btw the brick church- I have "backsteingotik" in my keywords for those. Showing off, probably, I don't think there's ever been a search on it or even brick gothic, but you never know.

Edited by spacecadet
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a PU sale for $10.64 today. The price for PU usage shows up as $19.95 here in Canada. What is the official (on the Alamy calculator) price for PU usage in the UK and Europe these days? And in the USA?

Edited by John Mitchell
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a PU sale for $10.64 today. The price for PU usage shows up as $19.95 here in Canada. What is the official (on the Alamy calculator) price for PU usage in the UK and Europe these days? And in the USA?

Mainland Europe: a measly € 9.99 (Euro)  :(

 

Cheers,

Philippe

Edited by arterra
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Showing as £12.99 here but I've had one for $12.05, my first. If it's a sterling sale it equates to about £9.99.

Edited by spacecadet
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I had a PU sale for $10.64 today. The price for PU usage shows up as $19.95 here in Canada. What is the official (on the Alamy calculator) price for PU usage in the UK and Europe these days? And in the USA?

Mainland Europe: a measly € 9.99 (Euro)  :(

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

 

Thanks. That's what I thought. Reason I ask is that a large print of this same image netted me $185 on a popular POD site last November. I see now that the POD print buyer was in the USA. Was it the same person looking here for another print? Hopefully not. I think that the PU price in US is the same as in Canada, i.e. $19.99 (?)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I had a PU sale for $10.64 today. The price for PU usage shows up as $19.95 here in Canada. What is the official (on the Alamy calculator) price for PU usage in the UK and Europe these days? And in the USA?

Mainland Europe: a measly € 9.99 (Euro)  :(

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

 

Thanks. That's what I thought. Reason I ask is that a large print of this same image netted me $185 on a popular POD site last November. I see now that the POD print buyer was in the USA. Was it the same person looking here for another print? Hopefully not. I think that the PU price in US is the same as in Canada, i.e. $19.99 (?)

 

 

I had one last month for $8.25. The price here in the USA is supposed to be $19.99.

 

Paulette

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I had a PU sale for $10.64 today. The price for PU usage shows up as $19.95 here in Canada. What is the official (on the Alamy calculator) price for PU usage in the UK and Europe these days? And in the USA?

Mainland Europe: a measly € 9.99 (Euro)  :(

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

 

Thanks. That's what I thought. Reason I ask is that a large print of this same image netted me $185 on a popular POD site last November. I see now that the POD print buyer was in the USA. Was it the same person looking here for another print? Hopefully not. I think that the PU price in US is the same as in Canada, i.e. $19.99 (?)

 

 

I had one last month for $8.25. The price here in the USA is supposed to be $19.99.

 

Paulette

 

 

Thanks for confirming. I'm hoping this PU client wasn't in the US. No way of knowing of course since PU prices aren't consistent. Perhaps it's time for me to restrict this particular image.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some very early pictures of David Bowie here on Alamy. During the last 5 years I have sold more than 80 signed prints, directly or through galleries. No way I'll let Alamy send full-rez files to clients so they can make their own prints. No way!

Rolf

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think part of the problem is that the lowest priced license (whatever it may be - personal use or presentation) is the default license in the"buy image" panel. 

 

What do I mean by this (just to clarify) - click on an image to buy and on the right hand side , the lowest priced option is already selected leaving the user just to click the big red "download" button without them really taking in what the options are. 

 

I personally think if NO default was selected and the user made to actively select a license a license type before the download - here would be more chance of the correct license types being purchased. I also think however that the total of sales would decline.

 

(Ex User-Interface designer). 

Edited by Julie Edwards
10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I should put in the description field that this is a photo not a box of tablets.

To be fair, maybe the buyers (that's two now) weren't total eejits. Maybe someone is really ill but can't afford meds in their country, and has very little to lose by taking possibly dodgy drugs. That would explain why the first one, and no doubt the second, would ask for refunds. If I'd done anything that stupid, I'd be too embarrassed to ask for a refund.

Anyone who buys a picture of X, Y or Z thinking they're getting the item pictured really is a brain dead moron, especially as Alamy advertises itself as a picture agency.  Unbelievable!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, Julie.

 

Maybe putting the default one on "website" would help. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some very early pictures of David Bowie here on Alamy. During the last 5 years I have sold more than 80 signed prints, directly or through galleries. No way I'll let Alamy send full-rez files to clients so they can make their own prints. No way!

Rolf

I have similar of many bands from the '60's and '70's including Queen, Manfred Mann and many others. Ditto not letting them anywhere near Alamy. In the 1980's I sold them through a reputable picture library but for proper prices and I knew that the library closely monitored their use. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some very early pictures of David Bowie here on Alamy. During the last 5 years I have sold more than 80 signed prints, directly or through galleries. No way I'll let Alamy send full-rez files to clients so they can make their own prints. No way!

Rolf

 

How do you stop them? See the other thread from Julie wqhere it seems even with no personal use the print option exists!

 

I put no personal use restriction on all my images but I am very concerned that prints may still be possible.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now