Regarding my shot http://www.rgbstock.com/bigphoto/nHTjCVe I received a message, from which the following is cut'n'pasted:
> I absolutely love this photo and it would be perfect for an idea I have for a garden product.
> I would be very grateful if you could send me details of any extended licence agreements > you have for using your photos, with costs.
> Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you.
I'm comfortable making my images available under the terms of the RGBstock license. What might someone be looking for in an extended licence? I'm just inexperienced here, and unclear what simply saying "that's fine, on you go" might lead to...
It means they want to use it for a lot of products. Because using it in this way is probably as a canvas for the image (I'm not sure), it is outside the allowed uses and you may ask for money if you wish. If they want a non-exclusive licence, then it can stay here. If they want an exclusive licence then you would have to take the image down. You can look at pay sites to see what the going rate is to make your decision. Ask for a link to their website, ask how much they are charging/going to charge for the item. Decide if you want them to freely use your image on a canvas, regardless of what the item is. You can then write an email worded that says something like you grant a non-exclusive licence for them to use your image for (whatever) purpose, or for a certain number of products, or for a limited period of time, etc.
Thanks, that's a help. Will ponder!!
@Dez, good concise reply, however, what would muddle the case is if the image has a lot of downloads when its free ? :)
It's only free within the site licence, Kray. If someone wants to use it in any other way then they have to ask permission from the owner of the image, and it's up to them to set the conditions. If people abuse the image licence, that doesn't mean you should give up and let them all do it. These images are not public domain.
I had a background texture on sxc (it's also on here). Someone contacted me to ask if he could use it commercially. I told him he'd have to pay. I think he had already used it by some things he said. I asked for $150 for an unlimited non-exclusive licence for it and he paid me. Now that was actually cheap given that he can use it perpetually. To be honest, I didn't care if he had declined, and I plucked the figure out of the air. I'm sure the same image had been used in similar ways by many people (it had a lot of downloads over there) against the rules, but I can't check everyone. That's what rippers count on.