Usage of stock photo in a press release

[Branislav Milic]

Hi

Yes, I read this file: 

https://wwwimages2.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/legal/servicetou/Adobe_Stock_Additional_Terms_en_US... 

But here's the situation: 

1. I buy an Adobe stock image and include it in our press release. 

2. I send the press release to the media as a PDF.

3a. The media copy the text of the press release but they also extract the photo of the PDF or screenshot it to illustrate the article. In other words, the media is using the photo that they didn't pay but we did. 

3b. The press release is not distributed to the media as a PDF but it is published on our website. This means that the stock photo illustrates the press release. The media then copies the text of our press release but they extract the photo of the website or screenshot it to illustrate the article. 

Can the media organisation use the photo without paying the licence?

And thus maybe use it for other purposes?

[Abambo]

Generally speaking: Press releases are supposed to be published by the media. So, you should make it clear, what can and cannot be used.

I suppose you acquired the asset under a standard licence:

3.1. b (iv) you may not use, reproduce, distribute, or display the Work with a press release that includes the distribution of the stand-alone image file to the media.

In this case, you seam to be OK, as you distribute all as a PDF. But media wants to publish often the illustrated press release, and you should make this possible in your own interest. We often include pictures with our press releases where we state that they have been cleared for publication with the release. This would need you to buy an extended licence:

3.3 a (iii) a press release, including distribution of the stand-alone image file to the media, if the Work: (A) is only
published in connection with the press release, and (B) is not used or disseminated in any other manner.

This would mean that media can use the asset to publish your press release, but can't use it for other purposes, including publishing press release unrelated stuff on your company.

All other use would imply that the media has acquired a licence on its own for this media.

Look here for more information on licensing: https://community.adobe.com/t5/stock/links-for-licensing-terms/td-p/11366788
(Disclaimer: As always with licensing, this is my interpretation of the rules. I think they are correct and advice is based on reading and interpreting the licence terms and on fair use for both the buyer and the artist/stock company, but I cannot rule out that my interpretation is wrong. I'm not an Adobe employee).

[Branislav Milic]

OK but what if the media extract the image or screenshots it, use it to convey the message of our press release, but then reuse the image for other purposes for other articles for which we are not aware of?

It's not our fault if they do that. But the licence owner may come AGAINST US with all kind of arguments such as: you didn't protect the PDF against copy, you didn't make a low version of the image on your website, etc. 

I see only one thing to do in that case: to include a note in the press release explaining that the media can not use the photo illustrating our press releasde. 

[Abambo]

I'm not a lawyer, but I suppose the media company should know their copyright laws. And if you see a problem in this, you have several possibilities:

• Not to use assets that are not yours. The reason to use stock for illustration is probably because there is no fitting media available.
• Ask a lawyer about the exact manner to protect you against claims.
• Buy the next-level licence and ask a lawyer about the exact manner to put in a disclaimer.

As you are so unsure about what may happen, I strongly recommend you to consult the lawyer in any case. That will cost you money once and give you a clean conscience for all future press releases.

As for the rest: copyright is quite a complex thing and there are differences from country to country, even if the basics are fixed in international contracts and conventions like the Geneva convention on copyright. You probably need a solution tailored to your needs and that, nobody can dispense here on the net.

[Branislav Milic]

OK thank you but the minimum thing that I expected by asking this question here is that somebody from Adobe answers with an official clarification. 

[Abambo]

Adobe employees very rarely come in on copyright issues.

First, there are the licensing terms that should cover all cases.

Second, they would open Adobe to liabilities, if their counsel would prove incorrect or incomplete.

Third, Situations cannot be easily judged from a distance. Legal situations are far from the engineering situations where a bug is either present or not. You see that all times when one court judges like this and the court above reverses that judgement based on the same law.

Fourth, Adobe employees on the fora are probably no lawyers, and they operate in the frame of what their legal department allows them to operate in.

Fifth, you can't expect legal advice from Adobe, and definitely not in a public forum.

As always with legislation involved, you only have a definitive and true answer if there is a definitive judgement in your case.

[Branislav Milic]

Hi, somebody from Adobe to reply here? 

I found a situation that your licence does not cover or is not clear enough for press releases and nobody from Adobe to come up with a better explanation?

[Abambo]

The license terms are clear. Ask your lawyer to counsel you.

[Rio5F9B]

I think in such cases it is better to use another royalty free images service. Because press releases are equated with the media, this is not the same as using images for personal use.

[Abambo]

That's nonsense!