It can be hard to find good images on the web for free. While some people are happy to run a quick image search, slap something up on their blog and call it good, it can be harder for more copyright-conscious people to get a free image that also looks great.

Seattle-based Getty Images hopes to help people out by allowing users to embed stock photos for free on Twitter, Tumblr and non-commercial blogs and websites. While the company has always charged for its images in the past, their frequent use on commercial websites means that they turn up in image searches, which then leads to someone else using them without paying for a license. The new feature is designed to give people an easy way to keep within the bounds of the law and still get good images.

Screen Shot 2014-03-05 at 6.04.35 PM

When a user embeds an image they get from Getty, it will include attribution to the original creator, as well as a large link back to Getty’s site as well as buttons that allow users to share the image to Twitter, Tumblr, or get their own embed code. People can find images using filters in Getty’s search, and once they reach an image they’d like to embed, they can preview it to see what it’ll look like before inserting it into a page or post.

That means people who don’t pay for a stock photo will still be able to take advantage of its existence, without running afoul of the law.

Getty’s definition of non-commercial is also fairly liberal. So long as an image isn’t being used to directly promote a product or service, the company is okay with people embedding them for free, so long as they’re okay with using the embedded frame, according to a statement from a company spokesperson emailed to GeekWire.

Embedded Getty Images content may be used only for editorial, non commercial purposes (meaning relating to events that are newsworthy or of public interest). If the use promotes a company, product or service, the users will need to purchase a license. If not, they can use the embedded content so long as they are happy to use it in the embed frame and functionality.

The presence of ads on a site doesn’t automatically make use of an embedded image on that site a commercial use. Think about sites like CNN.com or any online newspapers or magazines which support editorial content with site ads. The key attribute in classifying use as commercial is whether the image is used to promote a business, goods or services, or to advertise something.  If not, it is a non-commercial use. Likewise, corporate blogs would be treated as editorial/non-commercial unless the image is directly being used to sell or promote their products or services.

The only way for users to get a clean version of the image without any branding is to license it from Getty, which is part of the company’s plan. By creating an easy pipeline from when someone sees an image they want to allowing them to buy it, Getty is planning that letting people use images for free will lead them to spend more money in the long run.

It’s a part of the agency’s continuing push to bring more official licensing to places where its images are being shared. Last year, Getty struck a deal with Pinterest that involves the social networking company paying Getty for access to its image metadata, which is then attached to the appropriate images on the site to provide context and credit to the original photographer.

Comments

  • melitagnm105

    my Aunty Arianna got a nearly new silver Chevrolet Colorado
    Crew Cab by working part time off of a macbook air. try this J­u­m­p­9­9­9­.­ℂ­o­m

  • http://imgembed.com Alex Goh

    We have been doing embeds for about a year now, having Getty come in does excite us. Innovation in this space is definitely necessary – http://imgembed.com/

    Most importantly we use flattened jpgs to facilitate responsive designs and current CMS auto-generated thumbnails.

    We aim to be a fair marketplace, so our ethos might differ slightly from corporate Getty. Photographers strictly retain their rights and we only act as a facilitator. Free use is limited to 10,000 impressions but is allowable for commercial use. Our belief is that beyond 10k impressions, you are probably making enough that the photographer should be fairly compensated. While we might suggest image pricing, that is fully up to the image rights owners, giving them full control.

  • http://www.krafft.com/ Thomas

    Getty spent more than a decade illegally shaking down people for $5,000 to $15,000 each, claiming Getty’s image copyrights had been infringed. Getty’s legal-sounding letters would tell the site owners that they must pay the fine, and that Getty would not accept any excuse – even if the site owner had absolutely no connection with the original content or design that triggered Getty’s letter.

    Sadly, tens of thousands of innocent people were suckered into paying fines they didn’t need to pay. Today, you can search and easily discover that those Getty shakedown letters can be completely ignored.

    THAT is most likely the reason why Getty is “opening up” it’s collection today. So, just beware. Read the license agreement VERY carefully. If you’ve ever received a letter from Getty titled “Unauthorized Use of GettyImages’ Photograph” you’ll understand the public’s lack of empathy or trust for Getty.

  • Sean Kurtis

    I saw already smth version of image embed. It was another micoctock Pressfoto

  • -30-

    This is bullshit.Another excuse to not pay the photographer for hard sometimes dangerous work.From now on folks money up front or on delivery net 10 or no content for you!Lots of blood,treasure,travel expenses and lost sleep goes into the making of a professional image in the digital age.This is even worse than royalty free.ASMP members,NPPA members,Editorial photogs we need to stand together on this.On a private event I’m always happy to share with talent and promotions but this is absurd.When you go to the grocery store,the gas pump,or Home Depot do you get your product for free?What happens when you do not pay your ISP,cell phone carrier or electric bill?

  • Mark

    I think the reason behind gettyimages for these embeds, is to try counter-defend itself from emerging great sites such as – http://highresolution.photography or http://pixabay.com which offer exposure directly to the photographer. Getty images wants to even further their audience. They wan to eat everything and everyone.

Job Listings on GeekWork