Launched in May 2009, microstock business Vivozoom is trying to attract customers by claiming that its image warranty is far superior to those of other microstock sites, specifically iStockphoto and Shutterstock.
Vivozoom has warranted that it will defend its customers for damages and costs up to $25,000 in the event of “legitimate claims” from photographers, property owners and models. It is not clear what they will do about illegitimate claims, which many tend to become when cases get into court.
In principle, this sounds good, but how likely is it that anyone will be able to make such a claim to any microstock company? Their requirements—and particularly the requirements of iStock and Shutterstock—are that model and property releases be delivered when an image is submitted for consideration, and that photographers submitting images sign a contract. In fact, most microstock companies have release and contract requirements that are at least as stringent as Vivozoom’s purport to be.
The language of iStock’s warranty does say: “The content is ‘as is’, without representation, warranty or condition of any kind, either express or implied, including, but not limited to the implied representation, warranties or conditions of merchantability, or fitness for a particular purpose, iStockphoto does not represent or warrant that the content will meet your requirements or that its use will be uninterrupted or error free. The entire risk as to the quality and performance of the content is with you, should the content prove defective, you (and not iStockphoto) assume the entire risk and cost of all necessary corrections.”
However, this warranty primarily with the quality of a particular image file and its suitability to meet the unspecified needs of a particular customer, rather than the validity of photographer contracts or releases. iStock lawyers have chosen to deal with an issue that differs from the one singled out by Vivozoom, but it is not clear that there is any substantive difference in the way these two companies will deal with releases or claims from customers that receive something other than what they expect.
iStock COO Kelly Thompson says: “We are quite thankful that you realize how strict our process is and recognize the safety of our images and the steadfast reliability we have brought to customers for over nine years.
“We know our images are the safest in microstock, period. People have trusted us without question for nearly a decade and have not been disappointed. We have the best inspection process bar none, and an amazing compliance team that supports our portfolio of 5 million photo and video images with almost no issues.
“It is, however, also true that the microstock market is crowded, and there are many well-known sites out there that do an absolutely abysmal job inspecting imagery for legal usage, or keeping model and property releases with images, so we are pleased that another microstock company is showing from its inception that it takes image safety seriously.”