an online stock photography database geared toward the professional web designer and developer?? Am I missing something. I don’t know. Here is the attachment they sent me (it’s in Adobe PDF format) explaining their position. So for now, don’t expect any free web templates from me. And just wait until they get wind of some of the other web design sites out there also offering free web design templates based on images from iStockPhoto.com. I was quite taken aback by this and shocked by the implication, since I thought that the key was “for resale” as a web template. If it’s free, then it’s not being sold is it? Here are both my replies, sent this morning:
Also, Chris, are you telling me that EVERY IMAGE AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD on istockphoto.com is copyright protected in this way? If so, then explain how they can be used by professional web designers (such as myself) if they are not to be used for resale. In other words, if I design a web site using an image from istockphoto.com, and I /*charge my client for my services*/ (as I tend to do, since this is my livelihood), am I then also in violation of the EULA? Doesn’t this tie the hands of web designers, the very people iStockPhoto is catering to? Maybe I’m just dense, but I don’t understand this. Thanks for your patience. Joni Mueller webjones.org cc: Global Internet (Attn: Manny Quintero)Update: I just came from the iStockPhoto.com forum where it appears that even still, this new policy is causing confusion at the least and consternation (and worse) at most. It seems that if the image from iStockPhoto is embedded in such a way in the design that it cannot be extracted by the end user, then it is “okay.” Yet, the common thread pervading the forum is that “templates suck” and template designers are bottom feeders and templates never have and never will be an acceptable use on iStockPhoto.com. Yet, I read and re-read that EULA when I first started downloading from iStock a year ago and I never saw anything there that would have remotely suggested to me that it was wrong as long as it wasn’t “for resale.” And about the “new” EULA itself, it seems that there was NEVER any notice posted at iStockPhoto.com warning of an impending change or calling to the attention of site visitors the change to the EULA as would be courteous and as even e-Bay and my bank do when policies change. Yeesh.