Never been easier and cheaper to download a photo from Alamy

[Starsphinx]

1 hour ago, Martin P Wilson said:

 

If you opt out of personal use (as I have) it becomes 'presentation' - don't know but strongly suspect (probably ad hoc) users click the first, cheapest option whatever they are really doing.

 

There seems to be no validation of the purpose or even who the customer is if they use Paypal (just an email) rather than a credit card (at least then it should require name and address).

I think licencing should be changed to some sort of wizard - what are you going to do with the image.  Lots of people do not have the foggiest idea of the legalities of licencing terms (look at the confusion royalty free causes) and so do not understand how or if they are breaking the terms.  A wizard could actually be a selling point - know you are getting the exact licence you need.

[losdemas]

3 hours ago, Martin P Wilson said:

 

If you opt out of personal use (as I have) it becomes 'presentation' - don't know but strongly suspect (probably ad hoc) users click the first, cheapest option whatever they are really doing.

 

There seems to be no validation of the purpose or even who the customer is if they use Paypal (just an email) rather than a credit card (at least then it should require name and address).

 

Exactly right. I opted out of PU some while back. I knew that abusers would just switch to Presentation (being the same price), as an alternative, and this has proved to be the case. I've found abuses of Presentation in the past and, having had an increase in this type of license since I opted out of PU, I contacted CR notifying them of further abuse just the other day. It happens and will continue to happen. 

 

I am in full agreement with the suggestion that Alamy drop it's default selection of the cheapest licensing option when a potential buyer looks at an image. It's akin to active theft - if a buyer has to actively select the cheapest option, when that is not the genuine intended usage, then they are less likely to do so. Those who do so, could - and should - be actively pursued. 

[Marb]

Is there a reason you opted out of PU ? I see a lot of photographers, even famous press images have personal use as an option. I was thinking more for Arty type images is best to not have personal use as anyone could buy your images and make money out of a run of prints etc.

[losdemas]

25 minutes ago, Marb said:

Is there a reason you opted out of PU ? I see a lot of photographers, even famous press images have personal use as an option. I was thinking more for Arty type images is best to not have personal use as anyone could buy your images and make money out of a run of prints etc.

 

Clear and obvious abuse of the system. While I was only too aware that such abuse would only be shifted to Presentation, I felt it important to take a stand in order to make a point. We're I able to opt out of Presentation, I would do that, too. If Alamy restricted licensing downloads to a size/resolution appropriate to use, then I would be much happier. The current situation appears to suggest that they just don't seem to care. Lack of, or much delayed action on found infringements merely enforces that impression. 

[Marb]

25 minutes ago, losdemas said:

 

Clear and obvious abuse of the system. While I was only too aware that such abuse would only be shifted to Presentation, I felt it important to take a stand in order to make a point. We're I able to opt out of Presentation, I would do that, too. If Alamy restricted licensing downloads to a size/resolution appropriate to use, then I would be much happier. The current situation appears to suggest that they just don't seem to care. Lack of, or much delayed action on found infringements merely enforces that impression. 

Looks like there are absolutely no image libraries that are safe, professional, pay well, and ethical anymore.

 

Here is a classic example. DT sold a warehouse interior image to a company that produced this movie poster. I got about $3 for it's use and not only was it used as a movie poster but people are selling it as prints. DT wriggled out of any responsibility. I might even take this up in another thread as it needs looking into again but probably not much chance of ewt coming of it as it sold as RF at the time. 

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Looper-Face-Your-Future-Fight-Your-Past-Action-Movie-Poster-Joseph-Gordon-Levitt-Fabric-Silk-Posters/32507909425.html

[Craig Eisenberg]

Thanks Martin. I recently found out about this and opted many of images out of personal use licenses but more than half of them were "greyed out" and AIM prevented me from selecting the option. How do I opt all images out of personal use?

[Cryptoprocta]

On 11/12/2018 at 21:28, Ace said:

So click Alamy website,

search photo,

choose photo,

click buy as presentation photo,

Purchase at £11.99

 

So its no wonder that all my sales these days are this price ?

 

Are there any checks to see here the photo gets used ?

 

You can check yourself for online uses using Google reverse image search, but that wouldn't help if they were used in print. Certainly I haven't managed to find any of my 'dubious' personal use sales this way - but then I often nowadays can't find files which have a web use in their licence, so

[EzHighway]

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Presentation or newsletters, Use in a presentation/talk (eg,Powerpoint and Keynote) or in a newsletter.
Start: 23 November 2018
End: 23 November 2023

 

I Just recently found one of my images by accident while getting my motorcycle serviced at a Harley Davidson dealership.  It was in magazine advertising motorcycles with the above license and my uploaded image had two people on the bike with model releases. 

 

Wish I could opt out presentations,  power point  and news letters  as I have with personal use.

 

Alamy was notified and is looking into it.

[losdemas]

5 hours ago, EzHighway said:

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Presentation or newsletters, Use in a presentation/talk (eg,Powerpoint and Keynote) or in a newsletter.
Start: 23 November 2018
End: 23 November 2023

 

I Just recently found one of my images by accident while getting my motorcycle serviced at a Harley Davidson dealership.  It was in magazine advertising motorcycles with the above license and my uploaded image had two people on the bike with model releases. 

 

Wish I could opt out presentations,  power point  and news letters  as I have with personal use.

 

Alamy was notified and is looking into it.

Let us know the result!

[Sally]

I found three a couple of months ago, after going back over all of my presentation use licenses. They were all on websites. One to sell seeds on eBay. One in a gardening nursery website and one in an editorial by a London company. All of them ought to have known better IMHO.  They were all changed. My gripe however is that the new licenses started from the date they were purchased and not from the original date. In one case this meant that they got ‘free use’ for about a year. Also, one license was only 8 cents more than the original due to discounts, so a ‘higher’ license isn’t necessarily more expensive.

[Thyrsis]

I recently found an image of ours, bought for presentation use, on several chinese news sites. Alamy said they could not pursue it in China. Through helpful posts on this forum I found that the buyer was actually a professor in a well known business school in Oxford (where I live!) After making contact with her I gave her details to Alamy.

End result - image was relicensed correctly for a further $50. 

[losdemas]

7 hours ago, Sally said:

I found three a couple of months ago, after going back over all of my presentation use licenses. They were all on websites. One to sell seeds on eBay. One in a gardening nursery website and one in an editorial by a London company. All of them ought to have known better IMHO.  They were all changed. My gripe however is that the new licenses started from the date they were purchased and not from the original date. In one case this meant that they got ‘free use’ for about a year. Also, one license was only 8 cents more than the original due to discounts, so a ‘higher’ license isn’t necessarily more expensive.

This sort of nonsense makes me fume. 

[losdemas]

7 hours ago, Thyrsis said:

I recently found an image of ours, bought for presentation use, on several chinese news sites. Alamy said they could not pursue it in China. Through helpful posts on this forum I found that the buyer was actually a professor in a well known business school in Oxford (where I live!) After making contact with her I gave her details to Alamy.

End result - image was relicensed correctly for a further $50. 

I well remember this. So glad to hear that you finally got it sorted.