Jump to content



Recommended Posts

I got sent a link to a new photo-app site, Agora.

Essentially, a weekly photo competition for "pros and amateurs alike" with a $1000 prize - decent cash if you win - however, a quick look at the Terms and Conditions produces this:


"The User will hold property over the User's Content. Nonetheless, by uploading, downloading, distribution or any type of transmission of the User's Content to the Service, the User authorizes the Company a general, royalty-free, perpetual, sublicensable, transferable license at an territorial scope for the use of the User's Content related to the promotion and the Company’s activity, including but not limited to the right of use, safekeeping, copy, distribution, transmission, public communication, reproduction, editing, translation, execution of derivative works and/or alteration of User's Content through any media, including social media. Unless disposed otherwise regarding the availability of the User's Content by the latter in order to acquire rights on behalf of third party Users, the User will not receive compensation from Agora images for the sole availability of third party Users for the User's Content."


I'm as dumb as they come when it comes to legal jargon, but even I can spot the cuckoo in this nest - even though you remain copyright holder, the license they're being granted allows them to do pretty much anything they like.

Is this the norm for social media stuff (I'm also as dumb as they come in that regard too)?

Remind me please, why would anyone be tempted?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prize money and not reading the T & C's.😀


ie being dumber than you are making yourself out to be.  I do not believe you are dumb BTW.




Edited by Allan Bell
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be very suspicious of any collection of photos where the photographer was allowing the website to have that level of rights over the photo, probably even more if they're paying US$1,000 a week out to contest winners.  They have to be planning to license the photos to pay for the site and server and their own salaries, or they really conned some venture capitalists or both.   $52,000 off the top annually is going to require some income stream.  If the photos are coming from cell phones and such, many of them will be junk. 


Looking at the list of people (total of 22) working for this, they've got quite a payroll to take care of.   Even at $30K a year, that's around $660,000 a year, and $30K US might be low for some of them, but others might be working for exposure and stock options.   And there are technical expenses on top of that for bandwidth, servers, office machines, etc.  So, something around $750K to a million a year.  I didn't look at the app to see if they were selling ad space, or if there were other charges.   Many photo social sites have subscription charges, like 500px, and now Flickr for people uploading more than the new minimum there. 


My dad was a CPA.  Sometimes, I think I'm channeling him.  :)   But for anything, doing the math and finding out if something makes sense financially is useful.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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.