Quick question regarding Standard vs. Extended licenses. I would like to consider two use cases:
1. A 50 page picture book with an unaltered photo taking 80% of a page and the bottom 20% is taken by a caption or description (think National Parks).
2. A deck of 200 picture flash cards with 100% of the front with an unaltered photo, and 100% of the backside with text describing the picture.
It is possible that a handful of these pictures in either of these two products would be my own photos.
If I was selling a stock photo alone, I agree I would need an extended license. But if I sell a stock photo in a book along with 100 other photos, then that stock photo no longer constitutes the primary value of the merchandise but only 1% of the value.
I reviewed Adobe Stock Additional Terms. Because the value of the work is not from one individual photo, I was unable determine if "the primary value of such merchandise does not lie with the Work itself".
Is my logic correct? Would a standard license suffice for a picture book?
You’re doing a book about dogs. Dog pictures are the main subject and you take one or two from stock. The main motivation to buy your book are the pictures, even if only one or two of them are stock. —> Extended license.
You’re doing a book about dogs. Besides your texts and other data you collected, you are using one or two pictures from stock. The main motivation to buy your book are the data and the wealth of information they carry on to the reader. —> Standard license.
It’s not the value of ONE picture that is determinant for the type of license but the use that this one picture gets. A picture book is for sure about the pictures. That means “extended license”.
Sent from my iPad
Regards, Abambo Hard- and Software Engineer and Photographer.