<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Royalty-Free Images May Not be Liability-Free</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 23:29:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: web design company india</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/comment-page-1/#comment-172438</link>
		<dc:creator>web design company india</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:25:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/#comment-172438</guid>
		<description>Okay that’s great,

I am thinking royalty free is looking pretty attractive at this point, okay?

And it is attractive, from the “hassle quotient” on my point-of-view.

But in reality rights managed transactions are actually a little less hassle-intensive than you might imagine, while royalty free transactions are not completely “hassle free”:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay that’s great,</p>
<p>I am thinking royalty free is looking pretty attractive at this point, okay?</p>
<p>And it is attractive, from the “hassle quotient” on my point-of-view.</p>
<p>But in reality rights managed transactions are actually a little less hassle-intensive than you might imagine, while royalty free transactions are not completely “hassle free”:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sue</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/comment-page-1/#comment-168362</link>
		<dc:creator>Sue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 01:28:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/#comment-168362</guid>
		<description>This is timely for me to find this post.  I was just browsing a popular photo stock agency for a specific picture, which I thought I found.  It does have a recognizable face on it.  Now I will take precautions to find out if the appropriate releases were obtained.  Sounds stupid, but I guess I just assumed this, since its on a site where people go specifically for photos. Good post and info...thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is timely for me to find this post.  I was just browsing a popular photo stock agency for a specific picture, which I thought I found.  It does have a recognizable face on it.  Now I will take precautions to find out if the appropriate releases were obtained.  Sounds stupid, but I guess I just assumed this, since its on a site where people go specifically for photos. Good post and info&#8230;thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Microstockinsider</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/comment-page-1/#comment-163507</link>
		<dc:creator>Microstockinsider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:57:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/#comment-163507</guid>
		<description>Images from any reputable stock agency will be accompanied by a model and property release if needed. Virgin got into hot water because they (or their contracted designers) took images from flickr. Flickr is not a stock photo company. As a photographer its been very gratifying to see this story unroll, when I first saw the poster campaign on the subway platforms here in Sydney I began to thing that advertising had reached a whole new depth - taking free images from the internet (and to be honest rather good ones! its was a cleaver campaign). In the end the poster campaign got exactly what it deserved, excellent media coverage for virginmobile, and a lot of trouble too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Images from any reputable stock agency will be accompanied by a model and property release if needed. Virgin got into hot water because they (or their contracted designers) took images from flickr. Flickr is not a stock photo company. As a photographer its been very gratifying to see this story unroll, when I first saw the poster campaign on the subway platforms here in Sydney I began to thing that advertising had reached a whole new depth - taking free images from the internet (and to be honest rather good ones! its was a cleaver campaign). In the end the poster campaign got exactly what it deserved, excellent media coverage for virginmobile, and a lot of trouble too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sagem Phones</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/comment-page-1/#comment-49911</link>
		<dc:creator>Sagem Phones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2007 04:52:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/#comment-49911</guid>
		<description>But I cant' get my head round if a photographer takes a photo of someone, then someone uses his image, how can he sue the person?  Any compensation should go the person's image he took right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But I cant&#8217; get my head round if a photographer takes a photo of someone, then someone uses his image, how can he sue the person?  Any compensation should go the person&#8217;s image he took right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/comment-page-1/#comment-35658</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/#comment-35658</guid>
		<description>Personally, I feel a bit angry, if the photographers arn't doing the correct paper works. We designers are left vournurable to any law suit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, I feel a bit angry, if the photographers arn&#8217;t doing the correct paper works. We designers are left vournurable to any law suit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jermayn Parker</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/inspiration/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/comment-page-1/#comment-29450</link>
		<dc:creator>Jermayn Parker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:33:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/design/royalty-free-images-may-not-be-liability-free/#comment-29450</guid>
		<description>Should not photographers get a release form signed? This form should say that it will be sold or submitted on istock photos or something similar..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Should not photographers get a release form signed? This form should say that it will be sold or submitted on istock photos or something similar..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
