Copyright Facebook

[wiskerke]

 

 

Another thought. Would it be a good idea if Alamy had an opt out of licensing for social media use ?

But how?

One of the larger clients at this moment maintains a blog on Tumbler. And posts all their slide shows on there. One of my images went viral and within a week I counted 3500+ occurrences of my image on blogs, mostly Tumblr blogs. 1ct per use! Nothing could be done about it because the license gives the client the right to use the image on social media. And you all know the rest.

 

wim

When you say 'one of the larger clients' do you mean Alamy or yours? (I'm very new to this)

 

I'm just suggesting that if Alamy had a 'not for social media use' tick box, it would give photographers a choice wether or not they want clients to use their images on social media.

It's obviously not going to help you in your situation, but it may help some photographers. It's not a complete solution.

I'll admit that I may have missed something key here or I have not understood fully. As I say I'm completely new to stock and I'm still trying grasp the fundamentals by reading posts by vets such as yourself.

 

 

It's a client of Alamy that is using a lot of our images.

 

You do have the possibility to opt out by setting restrictions for each or all images.

Occasionally (but more often now) I notice that agencies or individual contributors have excluded small size web use and such. My guess is that this in effect is blocking social media use.

 

wim

[DDoug]

I think it would help if "restrictions" were changed to "allowances" using radio buttons that correspond exactly to the buttons available under the "Buy this image now for a 5 year license" heading for each photo.

 

Why have one expressed in the negative and the other in the positive?

 

Regarding Jill’s original post, I wonder if it would help to upload an image to one’s own website and then put a link on Facebook. If it is not directly uploaded to FB, can they still claim copyright, fair use, or whatever?