Public Art Copyright/One Click Editorial Use Only Option

[TABan]

I just had an interesting talk with an artist who's works include a sculpture located in downtown Chicago. I have a few images of this work on Alamy. The artist contacted me with concerns that the images of his work might be used commercially. I responded that since the images are listed as not having a property release, this isn't likely.

 

However, he pointed out that when one views the images on Alamy, all use options are available, even for unreleased images. And, he said an image of the same sculpture by another photographer was recently licensed for commercial use. This isn't a good thing and he's not happy, nor would I be.

 

I have set restrictions on my images of the sculpture to limit use to editorial only and I may do this with other images of public art. But, I think it would be wise for Alamy to implement a one-click editorial use only function as the current system makes you restrict the use list one by one, rather than only having to click one box. What do you think?

[Malcolm Park]

Yes, I have mentioned this on previous topics, and it is swiftly needed. It seems it is available as I’ve noticed it on some agency submissions. I shoot a lot of London gallery press views, with accreditation, but have to sign limited release forms at the galleries. The current Alamy restriction function is not adequate for these types of images where copyright is such an issue.

[wiskerke]

Why not include some contact info of the artist in the description?

And a line like: for commercial use get a release from the artist.

 

wim

[TABan]

Good suggestion on the artist contact info.

[John Mitchell]

Hasn't Alamy said that  an "editorial use only" button will be available soon? Or did I misunderstand?