2016-06-01, 11:26:50
(Ten post był ostatnio modyfikowany: 2016-06-01, 11:36:03 {2} przez adalbert74.)
Marcinie - dzięki za przykład - traktuje to jako BARDZO WAŻNY głos w dyskusji.
Brak exclusive - to faktycznie konieczność liczenia się z tym, że zdjecie zostanie wykorzystane przez kogoś innego...
Trochę na gorąco te temat wałkuje - przytoczę ciąg dalszy z cytowanego forum:
"If you're selling an image as RM on one site, and RF on another, you're likely to encounter legal problems. RM goes with the image, not the site. A possible and hypothetical scenario: I'm a buyer, and I want a particular image, but I don't have the budget to hire a photographer, model, MUA, stylist, etc. I don't want an exclusive, (...) How could the rights be tracked and managed otherwise?
Is that correct? If I sold an image as RM on Alamy, and the same image as RM on Panthermedia, then there is no linkage in terms of managing usage between those two sites. I don't believe that the basic RM license on Alamy allows anyone to purchase in a way that the image could not be used by a competitor say. If it was exclusive RM on Alamy, then OK, but not in any other circumstances.
Steve
I jeszcze jedno:
"I believe that, as content does not need to be exclusive to Alamy, they will contact you to ask if any exclusive RM terms can be granted. If the sale goes through (I once had urgent emails asking about a particular image, but the sale didn't go through), it is then up to you to make sure than any other outlet you sell the image knows about any exclusive rights you sold"
Polecam lekturę całości:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com...-alamy/25/
pojawiają się ważne argumenty dotyczące konkurowania z samym sobą (w skrócie: wystawianie zdjec w microstockach jako RF zmniejsza realnie szanse na sprzedaż tych samych zdjec jako RM w alamy)
... muszę to na spokojnie przeanalizować, co i Wam szczerze polecam
Brak exclusive - to faktycznie konieczność liczenia się z tym, że zdjecie zostanie wykorzystane przez kogoś innego...
Trochę na gorąco te temat wałkuje - przytoczę ciąg dalszy z cytowanego forum:
"If you're selling an image as RM on one site, and RF on another, you're likely to encounter legal problems. RM goes with the image, not the site. A possible and hypothetical scenario: I'm a buyer, and I want a particular image, but I don't have the budget to hire a photographer, model, MUA, stylist, etc. I don't want an exclusive, (...) How could the rights be tracked and managed otherwise?
Is that correct? If I sold an image as RM on Alamy, and the same image as RM on Panthermedia, then there is no linkage in terms of managing usage between those two sites. I don't believe that the basic RM license on Alamy allows anyone to purchase in a way that the image could not be used by a competitor say. If it was exclusive RM on Alamy, then OK, but not in any other circumstances.
Steve
I jeszcze jedno:
"I believe that, as content does not need to be exclusive to Alamy, they will contact you to ask if any exclusive RM terms can be granted. If the sale goes through (I once had urgent emails asking about a particular image, but the sale didn't go through), it is then up to you to make sure than any other outlet you sell the image knows about any exclusive rights you sold"
Polecam lekturę całości:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com...-alamy/25/
pojawiają się ważne argumenty dotyczące konkurowania z samym sobą (w skrócie: wystawianie zdjec w microstockach jako RF zmniejsza realnie szanse na sprzedaż tych samych zdjec jako RM w alamy)
... muszę to na spokojnie przeanalizować, co i Wam szczerze polecam
