Licensing restrictions

[losdemas]

Currently going through a variety of infringements, some of which may be helped by restricting their availability with libraries/agents, but this is proving difficult, if at all viable.

 

If I set restrictions within AIM as follows:

• Don't sell for consumer goods
• Don't sell for editorial
• Don't sell for personal use including single copy, non-retail wall art prints

- thus only leaving 'advertising and promotion' as an available option to licence. So far, so good. But when the image when zoomed, despite a notice clearly stating 'This image can only be licensed for advertising and promotion', still retains Presentation or newsletters and Website as options available.

Am I to take it therefore that Presentation or newsletters & Website come under the coverall of 'promotion' in Alamy's view? I would contact CR directly for an answer, but that is v difficult in the current (pandemic) circumstances.

Thanks for your help.

Edited June 18, 2020 by losdemas

[losdemas]

S'pose I should have asked this in 'Ask the Forum'? Never been there since Alamy expanded this forum! Still, before I move it across; anyone have an opinion on this?

[geogphotos]

I don't really understand the problem.

 

You don't want to block business buyers from paying for website use do you?

 

I'm not sure that restrictions like this can be made watertight.

Edited June 12, 2020 by geogphotos

[losdemas]

Difficult to explain reasoning on a public forum, Ian. And I don't know if you'll follow my drift here, but I'll try...

 

Let's just say that I would like to prevent certain people from licensing certain images under certain conditions for a certain period of time! I realise, of course, that I would have to apply these conditions for 'certain people' to all potential customers - as Alamy won't let me vet the customers! 🤣

 

3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

You don't want to block business buyers from paying for website use do you?

 

For a period of time, YES! Temporarily, I would like a certain image to only be available for certain usages.

 

3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

I'm not sure that restrictions like this can be made watertight.

 

No, I didn't think so.

[Betty LaRue]

Alamy has fixed this so if you block PU, the customer can get it through presentation. I think that stinks, myself. Just my opinion. So you might as well unblock PU.

[losdemas]

2 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Alamy has fixed this so if you block PU, the customer can get it through presentation. I think that stinks, myself. Just my opinion. So you might as well unblock PU.

 

I think that the PU situation stinks, too, but I have no intention of unblocking it. Someone who licenses under PU can claim or justify (at least to themselves) that they have ''misunderstood' the terms of the licence, then - having downloaded a full-size image - follow up with a request for a refund. 'Personal Use' is easily open to misinterpretation. Still happening that some believe and some claim to believe that they are buying actual products? Many of us certainly remain cynical. Not as straightforward with a presentation - so my block on PU remains.

 

That said, my original question is not directly about blocking PU or presentation.

 

13 hours ago, geogphotos said:

I don't really understand the problem.

 

You don't want to block business buyers from paying for website use do you?

 

I'm not sure that restrictions like this can be made watertight.

 

If either of you are active on the other place (started by Martin ~ 5 years back), I'll explain a little more clearly there. 👋

[spacecadet]

17 hours ago, losdemas said:

 

 

 

 

If either of you are active on the other place (started by Martin ~ 5 years back), I'll explain a little more clearly there. 👋

I've suggested something over there.

[losdemas]

2 hours ago, spacecadet said:

I've suggested something over there.

 

👍