Digital Download - what to do with use on social sites (ie FB timeline)?

eoren1

Was hoping to get some pros' advice on a situation I have with digital downloads.

Someone purchase a digital download of my image for personal use (which indicates it is meant for use as a wallpaper). He then posted it to his Facebook wall. To his credit, he added a link to my FB page in the caption. However, FB allows downloads so now the watermark-free image is free for others to grab...

Second issue is the new Timeline on FB. This has a prominent photo at the top. I had someone purchase a digital download and place that image (watermark-free) at the top of his timeline. There is no space for credit there. Should this be considered personal use? Does it warrant a higher cost? What can/should be done for attribution?

Would love to hear your thoughts.
E

eoren1

Had this moved over from the Pro Support forum as it seemed better suited over here. Still scratching my head over what to do with these scenarios.

DavidTO

Disclaimer: I'm not a pro.

It seems to me that they are using it for personal use. It certainly isn't commercial use (unless the Facebook page is a business page). They aren't responsible for keeping your images under lock and key.

They licensed it for personal use and that's what they're using it for.

eoren1

Thanks for the thoughts David. I sell my digital downloads through my Wordpress site using the Fotomoto company's plugin. The license for personal use stipulates:

To be used on your computer, phone or other personal devices as wallpaper with no business use or public display.

The issue I had with posting it to the FB account is that a watermark free copy could now be downloaded freely by his friends. Granted it would be too small to use for a print but could be used in lieu of purchasing their own digital copy for a wallpaper.

The FB timeline is an even more public location for the photo. My initial thought was that this was 'too public' a display. I'm now strongly leaning towards allowing this use as it could/should lead to questions from his friends about the source of the image and hopefully will direct that traffic to my site.

This is such a new use of photos that I thought I would seek other's input here.
Again, thanks for your thoughts.

Dan7312

This isn't exactly "pro" advise but doesn't it depends on what the terms of your license are? If you license defines wallpaper as the background on a PC, then putting it on FB will not be allowed. If your license isn't clear then I would think most people would assume they could paper their wall on FB with it.

I think the problem is that if someone downloads the image from FB and uses it somewhere else, maybe on their wall. If you could find it you can send FB and the copier a takedown notice and it would most likely be taken it down... but you would have to find it to do that.

There are services that will scour the internet for your images and send out take down notices, but that might not be an economic solution for you. A company I author videos for uses one and it's resonably effective but copies continually pop up.

You might offer a FB wall license that puts a "watermark" the image that identifies the purchaser. That might make it less attractive for other FB users to post on their wall and your purchaser might see that as a feature.

eoren1 wrote: »

Was hoping to get some pros' advice on a situation I have with digital downloads.

Someone purchase a digital download of my image for personal use (which indicates it is meant for use as a wallpaper). He then posted it to his Facebook wall. To his credit, he added a link to my FB page in the caption. However, FB allows downloads so now the watermark-free image is free for others to grab...

Second issue is the new Timeline on FB. This has a prominent photo at the top. I had someone purchase a digital download and place that image (watermark-free) at the top of his timeline. There is no space for credit there. Should this be considered personal use? Does it warrant a higher cost? What can/should be done for attribution?

Would love to hear your thoughts.
E

DavidTO

eoren1 wrote: »

The license for personal use stipulates:

To be used on your computer, phone or other personal devices as wallpaper with no business use or public display.

Oh, then you have a point.

eoren1

I might be right based on license terms but I wonder what others are doing with these situations?

I went back and forth with a friend about this for a while. The possibilities were:
1. Stop selling digital downloads
2. Sell watermarked digital downloads
3. Ease up on license terms and allow purchasers any personal use

I have a hard time with the concept of selling watermarked images so ruled out number 2. I have had several people buy prints and a digital download (presumably for a desktop wallpaper).

I don't make much off the sales of digital downloads but the good will generated I think makes 3 the best option.

Dan7312

Stock photo houses sell royalty free images that you are allowed to put on your web page. If they are on a web page they can be download of course.They typically limit the resolution you can use on a web page. For example Fotolia limits web page usage to 1000x1000.

eoren1 wrote: »

I might be right based on license terms but I wonder what others are doing with these situations?

I went back and forth with a friend about this for a while. The possibilities were:
1. Stop selling digital downloads
2. Sell watermarked digital downloads
3. Ease up on license terms and allow purchasers any personal use

I have a hard time with the concept of selling watermarked images so ruled out number 2. I have had several people buy prints and a digital download (presumably for a desktop wallpaper).

I don't make much off the sales of digital downloads but the good will generated I think makes 3 the best option.

angevin1

eoren1 wrote: »

I might be right based on license terms but I wonder what others are doing with these situations?

I went back and forth with a friend about this for a while. The possibilities were:
1. Stop selling digital downloads
2. Sell watermarked digital downloads
3. Ease up on license terms and allow purchasers any personal use

I have a hard time with the concept of selling watermarked images so ruled out number 2. I have had several people buy prints and a digital download (presumably for a desktop wallpaper).

I don't make much off the sales of digital downloads but the good will generated I think makes 3 the best option.

Can #3 have a caveat that is simple to understand? Perhaps saying if you're going "to use on FB, please use my watermarked photo instead: so that when others grab it from you, they'll automagically know who's work it is "

Sam

I went to your website and only saw a few photos for sale at cost. I could not find any way to purchase a download?

That said selling low res files for personal use and then trying to strictly interpret "personal use" for the general public isn't gona work.

Trying to enforce your no public / face book display will be like peeing into a 100 MPH wind. The results will be messy.

Sam

eoren1

Sam,
I don't sell with my smugmug account - that is really more for family use and posting on dgrin.
My 'real' site is at http://wednesdaysinmhd.com
Eyal

Sam

eoren1 wrote: »

Sam,
I don't sell with my smugmug account - that is really more for family use and posting on dgrin.
My 'real' site is at http://wednesdaysinmhd.com
Eyal

That's much better! OK I see it now, and see your clear download usage statement. While you have a point, trying to strictly regulate usage with the general public is a lesson in futility.

I would say limit the file size and don't worry about face book. Certainly enforce the usage for commercial use.

Sam

justus

digital sales
I would think limiting your digital sales to watermarked digital images would solve this problem. Having said that, some of your clients may still want to utilize the digital without a watermark purchase option so they can get prints...

If you price accordingly, you should see your problem solved. You could also include a paragraph on your client info sheets telling them which size digital download could be used for prints or personal use, vs. a watermarked smaller image, suitable for Facebook.

orljustin

justus wrote: »

I would think limiting your digital sales to watermarked digital images would solve this problem. Having said that, some of your clients may still want to utilize the digital without a watermark purchase option so they can get prints...

If you price accordingly, you should see your problem solved. You could also include a paragraph on your client info sheets telling them which size digital download could be used for prints or personal use, vs. a watermarked smaller image, suitable for Facebook.

As I've said before, as a client, it is not my job to promo your company. If my personal usage includes putting it on facebook for my friends to see, that certainly is personal use, and limiting it with some silly "public display" clause isn't going to stop me. "Hey Mom, I'd show you this shot of me, but I can't post it anywhere!". And I'm certainly not going to use or purchase anything with a watermark all over it.

What did you think personal use meant? Putting it on a cd and locking it in the closet?

mercphoto

I agree with Glort. First question I'm asking myself is what type of photos are your clients buying and then posting to Facebook? Portraits of themselves? Personally I think photographers are getting all up in arms about something that's not really a big deal. Small res files on Facebook, big deal.

The reality is people want to share their photos on Facebook. Don't be a hinderance to this. Don't make the mistake the RIAA did.

eoren1

To update the post with my experience, I ended up with a variant of my choice 3 above.

In fact, I made 14 of my images freely available and formatted for the timeline header with a small text copyright. This was more of a community gesture and greatly increased my fanbase on FB.

I do continue to pursue use of my landscape images on commercial sites with cease/desist letters and make them aware of commercial licensing fees. In fact, I just had a realtor use an image of mine on her $1.3 million listing. You would think she would pony up the $25 for a watermark free, legitimate version...

Snowgirl

eoren1 wrote: »

To update the post with my experience, I ended up with a variant of my choice 3 above.

In fact, I made 14 of my images freely available and formatted for the timeline header with a small text copyright. This was more of a community gesture and greatly increased my fanbase on FB.

I do continue to pursue use of my landscape images on commercial sites with cease/desist letters and make them aware of commercial licensing fees. In fact, I just had a realtor use an image of mine on her $1.3 million listing. You would think she would pony up the $25 for a watermark free, legitimate version...

MAkes sense. And yep, I'd go after your commercial usage for sure!

When I do portraits I give my clients e-versions for their use on Facebook etc. with a discrete watermark (different from the one I use on my website). It is really more of an 'artist signature' than a watermark, although it includes my url. It is small and discrete.

On my website I have a honkin' big watermark. It has been criticized here on DGrin but too bad. If it stops the theft, that's the point. I have learned to keep a separate and private gallery for images I want to place here for C&C without the watermark.

It's a new world out there and everyone is struggling to figure out how to adapt and survive - artistically and financially.

alixandra

hmmm.. i would think if someone posted it to facebook, you'd get more publicity... but, it would certainly be nice if your website is listed for potential clients...... i don't think I would mind, if it brought me more business.