RF Rights Standardization

Posted on 12/6/2002 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (0)



December 6, 2002

What rights do you get when you purchase a Royalty Free images? Many buyers think they get
all rights to do whatever they choose with the images they buy, but if you dig through the
fine print in the licenses that isn't true.

Recently, a publisher of children's books decided he could save money in the future by using
RF instead of RM images. This publishers has 24 titles with about 15 images per title. He
proposed to completely re-edit all the titles and replace the RM images with RF. This, he
thought, would eliminate his having to pay additional fees based on circulation, or when he
sells the rights to publishers in other countries to re-publish his books.

It is clear enough that once he purchased an RF image he could use it for almost anything his
company wanted to produce. But what about the other publishers who would translate the
content into their language and might reformat it in order to produce a book that would sell
well in their territory. The question was whether the publisher was allowed to take this
second step for the basic one time fee?

In the early days of RF the publisher would have needed to purchase a resale license for
products such as books, mugs, teeshirts, etc. The cost of a resale license might have been in
the range of $250 per image. However, in 1998 PhotoDisc changed its license and eliminated
the need for a resale license. Most other publishers followed suit.

When the above publisher contacted Getty the sales person said that only the normal fee was
required for such a usage as long as the product remained the same. (It is unclear why it has
to be the same product because once someone purchases an RF image they can use it in multiple
ways so long as they are the end user.)

Corbis said that if the "end users" are different each "end user" would have to buy a new
license. Jerry Kennelly, CEO of Stockbyte says, "if the prime publisher is reselling the
content in a digital format (other than postscript files or a locked down PDF) it is a

On the other hand if the buyer of the RF images is the publisher Bertelsmann or AOL Time
Warner -- companies that buy up everyone -- can any of their "divisions" legally use the

    (One thing to note here is that RF is really not that "hassle free" when you're a publisher
    trying to figure out how to do the right thing. If the images you intend to use come from
    several different RF companies and you need to carefully read each company's license - and
    probably get legal interpretation - to determine what uses are allowed.)


The problem is that there is no recognized industry standard for what is, and is not,
permitted when a buyer purchases an RF image. As a result many buyers just go ahead and do
anything they want with the RF images they purchase.

Kennelly believes that RF producers should establish some universal standards that are
accepted by all the players in the industry, publish them widely on a web site called
RFlicensing.com and then join the Business Software Alliance (bsa.org) to pursue enforcement
of their licenses.

At the PACA International Conference he placed current worldwide RF revenue at about $300
million and estimated that the industry could be earning $500 million if customers were
paying for all the unauthorized uses they are making. That's 67% additional revenue -- with
no price increases.

Kennelly praised Henry Scanlon's new approach at Comstock where the buyer is required to
designate the end user in Comstock's Flat Fee pricing model. He believes that the end user
should be designated on every license, and would gladly adopt that policy at Stockbyte if
others in the industry would join him.

Among the concerns are designers who buy a disc for one customer's project and then hold onto
the disc and use the images for future projects for different customers. Also many customers
are placing discs on inhouse servers that can be accessed by many users. The normal license
fee is for a 10 "seat" access, but it is not uncommon for more than this number of users to
have access to and be using the images. In such cases the customer should be paying for an
extra seat license.

Sensitive Issues

Another concern of some RF producers is how some of their images are being used to illustrate
sensitive subjects. For example a major international newspaper recently used an RF image to
illustrate a story on increased sexual activity among young people. The models were clearly
recognizable. The model release probably covers the producer -- in a legal sense -- but the
producer is having some "moral" misgivings because the models had no idea they were being
exploited in this way.

This is only one example of this type of use. RF images are being used everyday in a variety
of sensitive issue situations. To some extent the producers have only themselves to blame
because from the beginning RF has sold itself as providing "fully released images" which you
can "use for anything." Buyers who can't find someone who will sell them rights managed
images naturally gravitate to RF. Consequently, virtually all the people who deal with issues
that are politically or ethically sensitive to one group or another rely on RF images to
illustrate their issues.

Some in the RF industry believe this is a time bomb waiting to explode -- particularly if
some of the models happen to vacation in some of the more sexually liberal countries and see
how their images are being used. Or if some of the out-of-work lawyers recognize this as a

A lot of this problem could be eliminated if there was a universally accepted statement on a
site like RFlicensing.com that explained in clear, simple language that no uses are permitted
for sensitive issues unless the user has obtained a specific release for that use, and that
the user will be fully liable if such use is made without specific permission.


While these changes would likely benefit the industry, and probably even earn all the
producers more money, I am skeptical that producers will be able to agree on a universal set
of terms. There is too much temptation to try to retain a marketing advantage by offering
something slightly different.

Also, because Getty controls such a large portion of the RF market it really boils down to
what Getty decides to do. At any rate for those of us sitting on the sidelines it will be
interesting to watch.

Copyright © 2002 Jim Pickerell. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-251-0720, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Jim Pickerell is founder of www.selling-stock.com, an online newsletter that publishes daily. He is also available for personal telephone consultations on pricing and other matters related to stock photography. He occasionally acts as an expert witness on matters related to stock photography. For his current curriculum vitae go to: http://www.jimpickerell.com/Curriculum-Vitae.aspx.  


Be the first to comment below.

Post Comment

You must log in to post comments.

Stay Connected

Sign up to receive our FREE weekly email listing new stories posted.

Follow Us

Free Stuff

Recent Stories – Summer 2016
If you’ve been shooting all summer and haven’t had time to keep up with your reading here are links to a few stories you might want to check out as we move into the fall. To begin, be sure to complet...
Read More
Corbis Acquisition by VCG/Getty Images
This story provides links to several stories that relate to the Visual China Group (VCG) acquisition of Corbis and the role Getty Images has been assigned in the transfer of Corbis assets to the Gett...
Read More
Finding The Right Image
Many think search will be solved with better Metadata. While metadata is important, there are limits to how far it can take the customer toward finding the right piece of content. This story provides...
Read More
Where Is The Stock Photo Industry Headed?
For new readers, or those who may have missed some of what I have written over the last few months, the following are a list of stories worth looking at to get a sense of where the industry is headed.
Read More
Photography As A Career
It’s that time of year when high school seniors are waiting for college acceptance letters and thinking about future careers. If you know someone who is thinking about photography as a career you mig...
Read More
2014 Stories You May Have Missed
For many the end of the year is a time to review past experiences and consider whether it makes sense to chart a new course in the year ahead. Stock photography has changed dramatically for professio...
Read More
More Stories In 2014 You May Have Missed
Every so often I put together a list of the most important stories we’ve published in the recent past. If you are engaged in the business of stock photography the links below are to stories that we’v...
Read More
Getty: A Three Month Review
In all the excitement about 35 million FREE images it is worth looking back at some of things that have been happening at Getty Images in the last three months. After watching revenue decline for the...
Read More
State Of Stock Photo Industry: 2013
If you’re looking for an overview of the state of the stock photo industry as of October 2013 the stories listed below are a good place to start. Regular readers of Selling-Stock will have seen all t...
Read More
Education Market Shifts To Digital
If supplying pictures for educational use is a significant part of your business plan you need to be aware of how the market is trending toward digital delivery and how that is likely to affect the p...
Read More

More from Free Stuff