Jason Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Alamy sold one of my pics to a British mag for $6, it is on their site and it can be saved from the page. I, of course, received $3 and it doesn't seem fair now that the picture is available for anyone to download. The usage period was for 7 days and ended back in March. Is this a typical practice? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2300024/Osama-Bin-Laden-death-Third-Navy-SEAL-raid-unit-comes-forward-tell-story-terror-chiefs-death.html My pic is of the Navy SEAL badge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidC Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yes it is the going rate for an online publication in a UK daily - hopefully WHEN (not if) the Mail goes subscription and charges for its content the team at Alamy will renegotiate their terms to reflect the commercial nature.....but then I still believe in Father Christmas......... Incidentally your image already seems to be in use on http://www.zazzle.com/us+navy+stickers - it is quite common, but I checked the reflections at 100% - they are identical - however it has been there for quite a while........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 This one http://www.zazzle.com/navy_seals_rectangle_sticker-217254049956164605 looks like yours. Did you put it there? If not, go for it.I hope it's registered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Stand out thing for me on this was the date when the story ran to when you got told about it. 27th March 2013. 9 months to be told you made $3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Endicott Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yes, it's typical....and if it was licensed to the Daily Mail, you will more than likely find that image re-syndicated throughout the world. The last time I had images on the Daily Mail, I found the same images from Norway to China and Japan. All taken without my permission and there was nothing I could do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Morrison Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 It's ironic that a lot of unauthorised uses come with my credit intact, plus reference to Alamy and maybe the newspaper it was lifted from as well. A lot of people must rationalise that if they print the photo credits then everything's OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 It's ironic that a lot of unauthorised uses come with my credit intact, plus reference to Alamy and maybe the newspaper it was lifted from as well. A lot of people must rationalise that if they print the photo credits then everything's OK. With the outrageous re-syndication clauses it appears are becoming more common, it must surely be harder to determine at first glance whether any particular use is unauthorised or simply re-syndicated . . . as many have warned in this and other threads, we are having to tread more and more carefully in such matters to avoid embarrassing assumptions. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Is this part of the UK newspapers scheme or Novel Use (both of which I opted out of)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Newspaper. Yes, I ahd a $5.92 gross from the Mail but fortunately (ahem) more of mine are the Standard or Guardian at $28 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Is this part of the UK newspapers scheme or Novel Use (both of which I opted out of)? Hello, Ed. DavidC has seen and investigated at least one of these licenses, which allows resyndication seemingly ad infinitum for a one-off fee. Not sure if it's part of newspaper scheme (from which, as you rightly point out, we can opt out) or just a contract that newspapers or others can buy. I hope David reads this, he can answer your question more definitely. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 There doesn't seem to be anything in my licence details for similar sales that purports to allow syndication, just use within a group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 There doesn't seem to be anything in my licence details for similar sales that purports to allow syndication, just use within a group. I don't know what's in your license/s. I'm talking about particular license conditions that anyone may or may not have (yet) experienced, but they do exist. A very similar, and perhaps more worrying example DavidC quoted a little while ago was a web designer who purchased a license for a relative pittance, who was then able to use that image on several of their (the web designer) clients' websites without further payment, as per the conditions of their purchased license. Thin edges of wedges abound . . . dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabbro Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Opt out of UK Newspaper deal. That is the only thing YOU can do to prevent this happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Over lunch I had an inquiry from my own web site for the use of a photograph for a Swedish powerboat racer wanting to use it on an A4 page per month calendar. To get an idea of a price I looked at the Alamy price calculator for 1000 in Europe it would have been about £20. I got £25 without any quibbles (so could have probably asked more) and the whole transaction was completed in exactly 2 hours (about 10 minutes work) from enquiry to emailing the sized, and prepaid, image. Oh, the price was so low because the print run was 20! So even the calculator is ridiculously low so when Alamy then discounts ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidC Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 The agreement which had me bristling in addition to the 'group' deal which allows multiple daily, Sunday, weekly, national and provincial newspapers owned by the same 'group' to use an image multiple times (I think Trinity Mirror comprises about 150 titles in their group) was this one: Print, print and digital version, or standalone digital plus archive. UK, Worldwide and in Foreign Languages. Images can be sublicensed to international publishers and re-edited into bookazine format in the context of the original article use only. When extra rights were required they used to be charged for as extras - now it seems too much is 'thrown in'.......the syndication aspect is the arrangement whereby UK newspapers allow the use of their articles around the world as long as credit is given - often the article is staff written - so no problem - however, often the image is licensed from an agency and it does not belong to them, and they should have no right to permit the onward usage without a license that allows them to do so......... Or am I being greedy and unreasonable ? ....and I still don't know what a bookazine is - or which juvenile thought that word up..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Well that definitely allows syndication by another name. Not greedy, no. I haven't had anything like that. two-pipe problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 The 180-degree opposite ways of dealing with stolen images is Linda's and mine. (Yes, I understand we have not been talking about theft here, but hold on for a moment.) Linda has lawyers and a great deal of experience going after those who try to steal her images, many of which are of celebs. My advice to image cooks: don't mess with Linda of Chicago. I, on the other hand, do nothing. Well, I do one thing: I never post any images of mine on Flickr-style sites so there is no easy way to grab an image of mine . . . and I don't think I have any celeb pics. Most of you fellow contributors fall somewhere in the middle of Linda's and my positions. Now I know that there are some clever PS experts out there who can grab anything, but I don't see that happening and I save a great deal of time and effort by not worrying about it. The reason I mention this here is I consider the OP's problem as blatant theft under the thin vail of a bad contact. Maybe we should send in Seal Team 6 to settle this issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted December 19, 2013 Author Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yes, the photo on zazzle is mine as well. I used the src image finding program to see if the images I sold ended up online and that's when I looked on my account to see how much I made. $6 ($3 to me) seems trivial to photographers, maybe the bulk is a money maker for Alamy but we as individuals have little incentive to particpate. I found another pic ($7) on a Czech site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TABan Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I never post more than cell phone pics to Facebook. Anything else, I link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.