Received a claim from CopyrightAgent for my own photo

[ShakeIt258]

Hi all, this was a first for me: yesterday, a website of a friend, to which I provided a photo which I also sell on Alamy, received an email from CopyrightAgent demanding the payment of compensation for the use of said photo.
Since I gave him the photo myself (even before I made it available on Alamy), of course the "transaction" didn't happen through Alamy hence I can understand where the misunderstanding came from. I emailed CopyrightAgent explaining that I, the author, granted permission to said website so I'm hoping the won't bother him anymore.

 

Still, I wonder if there's a way to avoid similar situations in the future, for I sometimes give permission to use certain photos of mine which I also sell on Alamy. Since I sell them only on Alamy I always select that they are "Exclusive to Alamy", but I'm thinking that deselecting that might help with this?
I'm hoping anyone can advise me on this issue.

[Brasilnut]

9 minutes ago, Matt Ashmore said:

 

As I understand it, if you tick the 'Exclusive to Alamy' box in AIM ... then you are telling Alamy that for that image they ARE an exclusive agency and so they can legitimately send agencies like Copytrack to claim monies for infringements. Where this all falls apart though is, as stated further up in this thread is that the contract says:

 

Selling direct

Images can be sold through your own website or directly to customers and still be marked as Exclusive on Alamy.

.. which kind of says that they aren't exclusive... and hence problems can arise.

 

These agreements went back and forth with in-house lawyers and doubt it was an oversight, although more clarification would be welcome.

 

From my understanding, in a way it can still be interpreted as exclusive since there are no other agencies involved as far as they're concerned which tends to complicate matters. When selling directly it's more straightforward with no conflicts since you can set your own conditions.   

Edited 19 hours ago by Brasilnut

[Lynchpics]

33 minutes ago, Brasilnut said:

From my understanding, in a way it can still be interpreted as exclusive since there are no other agencies involved as far as they're concerned which tends to complicate matters. When selling directly it's more straightforward with no conflicts since you can set your own conditions.   

 

Alamy's own help page states that the contributor can personally licence / give away their own images and still state that they are Alamy exclusive. If an outside agent are chasing up images then they should check with the contributor before they instigate contact with the person / publication / website that has used the image. Alamy has been asked on this thread to comment to clear this up but there as been no comment from them. Only way i can see to cover yourself and your own personal customers etc is to go non exclusive. 

 

[M.Chapman]

3 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

As I understand it, if you tick the 'Exclusive to Alamy' box in AIM ... then you are telling Alamy that for that image they ARE an exclusive agency and so they can legitimately send agencies like Copytrack to claim monies for infringements. Where this all falls apart though is, as stated further up in this thread is that the contract says:

My understanding, (and I thought Alamy had confirmed this) is that marking an image as 'Exclusive to Alamy' indicates that the only Agency currently authorised to offer licences is Alamy, but licences to the image may have been offered by other agencies previously.

Is anyone able to reconfirm this? This does of course mean Alamy risks chasing a 'false' infringements sometimes.

 

Mark

Edited 15 hours ago by M.Chapman

[John Richmond]

As part of my volunteer work at The Garden House in Devon I provide images free of charge for their website, social media and PR use.  In fact, most of the images on their website and Facebook/Instagram feeds are mine.  Some of those images have been uploaded to Alamy, my only agency, and, where possible, marked as non-exclusive - but I may have missed a few.  Alamy did query me last year about a possible infringement and were quite understanding when I explained the position.  They indicated that a note would be added to my account to avoid similar queries in the future.

[CRS]

After having read the above thread, I have a thought...perhaps after you have uploaded the photo to Alamy, you can write under the "Optional" tab  (Tell us more about your image) that you have given this photo to a friend for their private use or use on their website and that should avoid all the unnecessary problems!

[ShakeIt258]

9 minutes ago, CRS said:

After having read the above thread, I have a thought...perhaps after you have uploaded the photo to Alamy, you can write under the "Optional" tab  (Tell us more about your image) that you have given this photo to a friend for their private use or use on their website and that should avoid all the unnecessary problems!

This might be a good idea, if that info actually goes to Alamy and only to them.
I've never really considered it, so I'll have to look up if that could actually be of any use (and not disclose what's written in there to Alamy clients).

[Lynchpics]

44 minutes ago, CRS said:

After having read the above thread, I have a thought...perhaps after you have uploaded the photo to Alamy, you can write under the "Optional" tab  (Tell us more about your image) that you have given this photo to a friend for their private use or use on their website and that should avoid all the unnecessary problems!

 

My images on Alamy use my Alamy pseudonym (when they are credited). Images i licence or give away myself use my name and i insist that the credit used is my name, i have only had to chase up one usage where that was not done. 

[Avpics]

1 hour ago, ShakeIt258 said:

This might be a good idea, if that info actually goes to Alamy and only to them.

I think it's displayed under the image on display for all to see.

 

Also, I get the impression that this is outsourced to CopyrightAgent and their auto-searching software so would have little human interaction for any such details. If the 'victim' comes back with an honest response in how they've come by the image then Alamy will contact the contributor to confirm their alibi.

Edited 12 hours ago by Avpics

[M.Chapman]

1 minute ago, Avpics said:

I think it's displayed under the image on display for all to see.

Indeed it is, so it wouldn't be a suitable place to put notes to Alamy's infringement team.

 

Mark

[Sultanpepa]

8 hours ago, spacecadet said:

After Alamy broke its promise to give higher commission on exclusive images there's no incentive other than possible infringement fees.

 

That's the main reason that last week I had Alamy mark all my images 'Exclusive'. I've had to swallow my pride a bit on that score but sales are so poor the odd infringement might just boost the years tally.

[CRS]

1 hour ago, ShakeIt258 said:

This might be a good idea, if that info actually goes to Alamy and only to them.
I've never really considered it, so I'll have to look up if that could actually be of any use (and not disclose what's written in there to Alamy clients).

 

Just read this on Alamy so perhaps not a good idea after all, seems it pertains to customers!

 

 

Additional info

1 2 3

4

2. This is where you can add any additional background information about the image that would be useful for a customer to know. This field is not searchable and does not have an impact on the search engine

[gvallee]

6 hours ago, M.Chapman said:

My understanding, (and I thought Alamy had confirmed this) is that marking an image as 'Exclusive to Alamy' indicates that the only Agency currently authorised to offer licences is Alamy, but licences to the image may have been offered by other agencies previously.

Is anyone able to reconfirm this? This does of course mean Alamy risks chasing a 'false' infringements sometimes.

 

Mark

 

This is also my recollection Mark. I didn't mention it because I can't recall in what form it was announced (post, e-mail, comment, tweet?). It wasn't that long ago.

 

[BidC]

13 hours ago, ShakeIt258 said:

I wonder if, had I marked the photos as "non exclusive" and sold them somewhere else, the people who bought them from another agency could receive compensation claims from Alamy.
It seems a very confusing and aggressive practice.

 

Perhaps, this all happened because I marked the photos as exclusive to Alamy, and I'm hoping it's the case so that I can just unmark them and avoid going through this again in the future.

 

Have Alamy given you any info about this, to help if there is a next time ...