Flickr - Getty deal is exclusive

P

petemc

Messages
9,504
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
No
http://www.jmg-galleries.com/blog/2009/01/22/flickr-collection-on-getty-why-im-not-taking-part/

In the case of the Flickr-Getty offer… it is an exclusive agreement. There is a limitation on selling images that are similar or “sister images” for commercial purposes. Use of photographs selected by Getty to sell on your behalf are OK to use for personal or self promotion. How convenient that they also include the acceptability of “Photo Sharing” in these terms. Per the terms its also OK to sell prints or books as long as they are limited edition and/or signed. Note if a Getty selected image has been previously sold through a prior licensing agreement either individually or through another agency it is then ineligible for submission.

For those that are new to stock photography “exclusivity” should be approached very carefully. Many old timers recommend avoiding exclusivity like the plague due to the limiting nature of it. It’s tough enough to make a buck these days with photography, but signing an exclusive deal is a sure fire way to cut off other income opportunities. What I find most troubling about the Getty agreement it is that they don’t permit the sale of your work on your own web site. Granted for some this may be a non-factor as not everyone wants to deal with the headache of licensing their own work directly. I suppose my outlook on this is that if you’re serious enough to sell your photography through an agency you should be capable of selling your own work individually and reserve the option to do so.
Click to expand...
 
Makes it pretty much useless then :( Not that they have contacted me, but that is proper crap!
 
You would have to know that it'll be completely worth it. That 20 or 30% of Gettys sales are going to outweight 100% of your own personal ones.
 
petemc said:
You would have to know that it'll be completely worth it. That 20 or 30% of Gettys sales are going to outweight 100% of your own personal ones.
Click to expand...

I suppose for peole only just starting to sell their images, that is worthwhile trade off, however, if your image is sold through getty and therefore gets exposure and is wanted by others, you have to consider if that image might be worth considerably more through private sales in the longer term. Then again, if it hadn't been for Getty selling it, it might not have got the exposure. Catch22 for those that have not yet built up a personal following and regular sales :nuts:
 
Could someone clear something up for me regarding this flickr/getty relationship.

Say im contacted by getty through flickr to use x photo, when they say use that photo does that mean theyve been contacted by a publication wanting a certain type of image, they dont have it in their library so trawl Flickr for it? Or is it them just trying to expand their library?

If its them being contacted by a publication, what's to stop the publication checking getty's site for the image, find they dont have it and sourcing it on flickr themselves, most likely getting it cheaper than through getty?
 
the_doctor199 said:
Could someone clear something up for me regarding this flickr/getty relationship.

Say im contacted by getty through flickr to use x photo, when they say use that photo does that mean theyve been contacted by a publication wanting a certain type of image, they dont have it in their library so trawl Flickr for it? Or is it them just trying to expand their library?

If its them being contacted by a publication, what's to stop the publication checking getty's site for the image, find they dont have it and sourcing it on flickr themselves, most likely getting it cheaper than through getty?
Click to expand...


Getty will tie up images they feel are most likely to be in demand before anybody else gets a look in, I guess on the understanding that if it sells...it sells, if not its no skin off their nose is it, you can't use it anywhere else because its an exclusive deal.
The devil is in the detail, and that "sister" photo, or images similar to it that they tied up, can't be used either, who decides whether its similar or not ?, well....Getty, and you'll soon find out, cos Getty love to sue.
There is another angle I can't remember whether I posted it or not, I write loads of rubbish that I don't end up posting, anyway, its about copyright and conflicts of interest.
Anybody picked up the PicScout angle yet ?


I didn't read the entire article first time around, but he's alluding to it near the end..

The huge red flag for me with this is that since your image has to be on Flickr and Flickr has done nothing to address security holes and tighten up their system to avoid infringement; it would seem to me Getty’s greatest means of income will be going after infringers taking advantage of Flickr’s lackadaisical security. Perhaps this is overly cynical, but at the rate I’ve had images infringed on Flickr I can’t help but feel that I’d be signing over numerous infringement cases to Getty by taking part.
 
Just had an invite to submit 14 of my images. A bit unsure about it, as I don't like this exclusivity stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top