New contract, "Agent" vs "Licencee"

[Phil Crean]

Hi Alamy,

 

Can you explain what the difference is between the terms, "Agent" vs "Licencee" in the new contract please.

 

Thanks,

Phil

[Phil Crean]

Sent the same question to CR and just got this super rapido reply:

"Hi Phil

There is no difference at all in the way we work it is simply a change in terminology to make the wording more universal.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,
Shelley"

 

So why change it? Surely there must be some difference in definition???

 

Phil

[spacecadet]

Bit of a legal nicety, I think. I always thought that Alamy was our agent, although I recall one contributor here who always insisted they weren't.

In other words, I don't know. There is no explanation with the changes that I can find, despite the amendments page saying there is.

Slightly more of concern is the term that says images must comply with property and privacy laws of the country they were taken in. Most of us have probably got ones which don't. Sounds like cover to remove images which might not, a favourite of Alamy's, sole discretion and all that.

 

Edit: good to hear that Alamy don't intend it to change things, in which case, in law, it probably doesn't.

[Sultanpepa]

I may be wrong but I'd imagine that being an agent gives them rights to promote and distribute to other agents. where a licencee doesn't. i.e. Doesn't allow distribution? I may be, and probably am wrong though. lol

 

Edit. Just seen your reply from CR.

[PhotoEclectica]

I've had a look at today changes to the Alamy contract. Nothing relevant to me but a few adjustments related to distribution to third parties (agent is probably more appropriate than licensee where dealing with other agents).

[Allan Bell]

Looks like Alamy are setting things up for a takeover.

 

Allan

[M.Chapman]

More tinkering behind the scenes.

 

The clause that makes me chuckle is this one (this isn't new).

 

1.5. You accept that you are solely and exclusively responsible for all Images that you submit and for all data that you store on Alamy’s servers. You acknowledge that Alamy does not and cannot review all Images uploaded and is not responsible for the Images. Where Alamy makes available Images this should be considered only as a courtesy and does not limit your responsibility for the Images.

 

(It's my bold and underline of the word courtesy)

 

A courtesy? It hardly seems to be an appropriate term for a business relationship where the sale proceeds are split 50/50. Let's be honest, we're both in it for the money and there's a contract between us.

IMHO the term "courtesy" wouldn't stand up in court as a way of absolving oneself of all responsibility for materials on their websites (as no doubt Facebook and others are going to find out in the long run).

 

But what do I know, I'm no lawyer.

[photomi7ch]

Hi, there is a difference between agent and licensee basically Alamy can not be the licensee the photographer is as we license them to sell on  our behalf the image we submit. If you read the contact Alamy states they will be changing our images to fit sale criteria and negotiate the terms of sale which makes them an agent. They can not be the licensee they don't own the copyright of the  image.

 

I find that Alamy has a cheek to make us responsible  for copyright infringement with an image With all the resources that Alamy has at its disposal to check this. It has done it for secondary license it can do it for this.

 

 

[Richard Baker]

 

Looks like Alamy are setting things up for a takeover.

 

It's felt likely for a few years now. I'm still watching that space.

 

Richard.

[York Photographer]

I did spot this

 

You appoint Alamy as your non-exclusive agent to exploit all Rights in the Images in the Territory in all media and formats whether current or yet to be developed (including for the avoidance of doubt and without limitation digital media, print, motion picture, television, video, cable, computer, radio, cartoon, merchandising and/or Internet, making the Images available for reproduction on physical articles and items including without limitation on prints and posters, making the Images available on electronic equipment, mobile phones and mobile devices, CD-ROM, DVD, digital optical disk data storage and other media or via the Internet, and including them in any catalogue, Internet sites or marketing), using the System

 

 

Can't see Radio ever being a big market!

[Phil Crean]

I did spot this

 

You appoint Alamy as your non-exclusive agent to exploit all Rights in the Images in the Territory in all media and formats whether current or yet to be developed (including for the avoidance of doubt and without limitation digital media, print, motion picture, television, video, cable, computer, radio, cartoon, merchandising and/or Internet, making the Images available for reproduction on physical articles and items including without limitation on prints and posters, making the Images available on electronic equipment, mobile phones and mobile devices, CD-ROM, DVD, digital optical disk data storage and other media or via the Internet, and including them in any catalogue, Internet sites or marketing), using the System

 

 

Can't see Radio ever being a big market!

 

New market for those high noise images!

 

Phil

[Martin P Wilson]

More tinkering behind the scenes.

 

The clause that makes me chuckle is this one (this isn't new).

 

1.5. You accept that you are solely and exclusively responsible for all Images that you submit and for all data that you store on Alamy’s servers. You acknowledge that Alamy does not and cannot review all Images uploaded and is not responsible for the Images. Where Alamy makes available Images this should be considered only as a courtesy and does not limit your responsibility for the Images.

 

(It's my bold and underline of the word courtesy)

 

A courtesy? It hardly seems to be an appropriate term for a business relationship where the sale proceeds are split 50/50. Let's be honest, we're both in it for the money and there's a contract between us.

IMHO the term "courtesy" wouldn't stand up in court as a way of absolving oneself of all responsibility for materials on their websites (as no doubt Facebook and others are going to find out in the long run).

 

But what do I know, I'm no lawyer.

 

Especially as in law being an agent has specific meaning with associated responsibilities. Can't remember the details (just back from a trip) so I will try to remember to look it up at the weekend.