Jump to content
Paulstw

License dates not being adhered to.

Recommended Posts

Mail Online 

 

Bought one of my images (D2YTC2) back in Feb 2013. 

The license period was below.


Start: 05 February 2013
End: 12 February 2013

 

This was the first sale, and then they bought it again, for $2.96, and the license period was reported as;

 

Start: 01 February 2013
End: 08 February 2013

 

As far as I can see, they are still using the image on their site, according to the link above. Seems to me that there is no policy on keeping to the license period and this seems a little unfair to me. 

 

Should I be reporting this to member services? or is there another secret deal with newspapers that I don't know about? 

 

Cheers, 

 

Paul


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check licence. It should say 'Rights granted for archival use' or similar. In plain English it's there forever in the depths of the publication website.

 

No different to a magazine only use though. Images in print are still there in print after the magazine issue 'expires'.

 

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, I don't know, but I imagine that pages such as the one you link to are archived (in the same fashion as blogs) for ever and a day.

 

Fantastic for the site owner concerned, as the page is spidered and logged by Google et al: the main content being the archive material, while the rest of the page is automatically updated with links to contemporary content (+ the ever-present ads).  All great news: the search engines bring in viewers looking for (in this case) harsh UK weather content (be it text or images), and the site gets more cash from advertisers and higher ratings from the search engines for the content.  You meanwhile receive sweet FA in return (apart from your images being available for nicking by every T, D & H until eternity.  That's just the way it is - their 'limited' use really only stretches as far as the 'published' date they put on the article (PUBLISHED: 15:11, 4 February 2013 | UPDATED: 18:30, 18 March 2013).

 

incamerastock has just replied while I've been writing this and put things far more succinctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks folks. I suspected this may be the case. Not holding my breath on fortunes from recent finds of mine on the Express site and Daily Record sites. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.