Is it technically illegal?

[rafiki55]

Just wondering, I always see people post images from Getty Images on their blog..the pics have the Getty watermark and everything (they're the previews you can get them from their website)....so is this technically illegal?

How do the popular blogs get away with this? They get thousands, if not hundred of thousands of readers....surely they could afford these images...yet they still post the watermarked images. Why does Getty stop this?

[XU1]

They should be thankfull for the advertisement...imo....I dont think any money is made from using them on blogs....if they were, Getty would be after them like wounded bulls..

iTony

[gerbick]

You can use those images as long as the credit is given - that's why they're watermarked - and you don't claim it as your own.

Or make a profit from it.

[gesteves]

What if you use the non-watermarked previews you get when you log in, and give credit?

[jasonsplace]

What if you use the non-watermarked previews you get when you log in, and give credit?

That is ok as long as you credit them however it tells you to in the license agreement.

[rafiki55]

You can use those images as long as the credit is given - that's why they're watermarked - and you don't claim it as your own.

Or make a profit from it.

Oh I did not know that...I read through the license agreement and I thought it only applied when you purchased them. So does that mean when you do purchase them, you can use them without giving credit?

They say for editorial use...so does a blog count? Also what counts as making a profit from it? I'm positive the popular blogs are making $$ off their site, but not specifically from the images...does that count?

[jasonsplace]

I have never actually used Getty images but I have a subscription to Photos.com. Once you have an account you can use the images in almost way that you want (there are a few exceptions) but you must credit them properly. It lists the proper way of crediting them in each instance in the license agreement and asks you to contact them if you have any questions. If you want a super high res image (like billboard quality) you have to pay extra. I'm guessing that Getty is probably similar but im not positive.

[random25]

Technically nothing is illegal as long as you dont get caught.

[jasonsplace]

Technically nothing is illegal as long as you dont get caught.

Not true. something illegal is always illegal. If you don't get caught then you dont have to suffer the consequences but that doesn't make it right.

[random25]

I know, i just like saying that.

sounds like the old "if a tree falls in the woods, and no one is around" kinda thing to me.

[gerbick]

Oh I did not know that...I read through the license agreement and I thought it only applied when you purchased them. So does that mean when you do purchase them, you can use them without giving credit?

When purchased, you've purchased the rights to use them, but not to claim them as your own images. So for instance, if you used it in part of a design, the compilation is yours, the graphic is yours, but portions of your graphic originated from that Getty image.

They say for editorial use...so does a blog count? Also what counts as making a profit from it? I'm positive the popular blogs are making $$ off their site, but not specifically from the images...does that count?

By making a profit, using it in part of your blog is questionable. Did you get the money because of the image, or your verbiage? As it stands, you should always give credit to where the picture originated.

[rafiki55]

Okay let me get this straight...(correct me if I'm wrong)

So let's say it's for my blog where I write my opinion about news events and these opinions/news reports are accompanied by images from Getty. So...

1) If I don't buy the image...I can just download the image with the watermark off their site and it's okay to use it (put it in a blog post) as long as I give credit (author name, collection, getty images).

OR

2)If I do buy the image from Getty (using the proper license...i.e. for the web, 30 days, for a blog, etc), then I can use the image without giving credit? And of course I don't own any other rights to the image, but I am allowed to post it on my site. The only difference in this option is that there is no watermark on the image?

If this is true, then it would lead me to think that for the $$, it's a much better deal just to use pictures with the watermarks as it doesn't make a huge difference on a blog. Correct?

Thanks a lot!

[gerbick]

Put it to you this way.

Even if the pictures are acquired by the New York Times without the watermark, they still credit Getty Images.