That is why i have trouble getting shoots with young kids. I tell the parents about the restricted use rights but mention that nobody can really control how they might be used.

No, sorry, didn't ask Istock since I don't contribute to them.

Got a reply from Alamy too now, and they are ok with that use just like Depositphotos. Did not expect that. I thought they were one of the "good guys" :-/

Im glad all the other agencies were very clear about that they did not allow the use though�.at least something.

Alamy doesn't agree that erotica is pornography and recommend uploading as RM and set "sensitive use" as restriction for future uploads if there is a concern.

Yes, pretty much all the standard releases have a wording that reads that images cannot be used in pornography or defamatory uses. That is what the model have signed. Try to explain to that model afterwards that the book with the undertitle "taboo sex", "rape fantasies" or "gangbang fantasies" on which she  on the cover of, displayed for the whole world on amazon.com, is not considered "pornographic" by the image agency. This is huge problems waiting to happen and it is not that agency who will be the punching bag. At least not initially 

Written erotic fiction isn't the same as a visual porn magazine or website, which is why many agencies don't see erotica as porn.

On author forums and websites, I've seen agency responses reported as basically, "don't make it look like the model on the cover is anything but an illustrative image." I guess it would help authors if they put a disclaimer to that effect. However, most people have common sense and know the model on the book cover isn't actually being taken by dinosaurs for sexytimes:

http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/10/qa-the-women-who-write-dinosaur-erotica.html

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/10-real-book-covers-from-dinosaur-on-human-sex-novels/

These books were all over the American news a few months ago. Notice how these are just swimsuit shots. I did warn in a thread months ago that authors are now choosing less raunchy photos so their books will show up in basic search results. (Raunchy book covers will only show up in a specific kindle search.) So, yeah a model posing for a business or glam shot might show up on dino porn. Photographers need to perhaps hire models who understand this.

And photographers, please don't assume a picture on Amazon is automatically in violation of a license agreement, and then go straight to Amazon claiming copyright violation. I've seen many reports of this on author forums, and frankly, I don't think the practice is ethical.

In the cases I've seen, Amazon assumes the copyright claim means the picture was stolen (this is the unethical part because the photographer is claiming something that isn't true), and takes it down. The author then has to prove the picture was indeed licensed, losing income and book rank in the process. Once Amazon gets proof that a license was purchased, it puts the book back. The most a photographer can gain from this is that maybe the author will change the cover anyway (which I have seen).

If you see an image use you don't like, do the honest thing, and find out which agency the image was bought from, and then report it to that agency.  As we've seen in this thread, different agencies have different ideas about what is allowed. Don't assume.

Written erotic fiction isn't the same as a visual porn magazine or website, which is why many agencies don't see erotica as porn.

On author forums and websites, I've seen agency responses reported as basically, "don't make it look like the model on the cover is anything but an illustrative image." I guess it would help authors if they put a disclaimer to that effect. However, most people have common sense and know the model on the book cover isn't actually being taken by dinosaurs for sexytimes:

http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/10/qa-the-women-who-write-dinosaur-erotica.html

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/10-real-book-covers-from-dinosaur-on-human-sex-novels/

These books were all over the American news a few months ago. Notice how these are just swimsuit shots. I did warn in a thread months ago that authors are now choosing less raunchy photos so their books will show up in basic search results. (Raunchy book covers will only show up in a specific kindle search.) So, yeah a model posing for a business or glam shot might show up on dino porn. Photographers need to perhaps hire models who understand this.

And photographers, please don't assume a picture on Amazon is automatically in violation of a license agreement, and then go straight to Amazon claiming copyright violation. I've seen many reports of this on author forums, and frankly, I don't think the practice is ethical.

In the cases I've seen, Amazon assumes the copyright claim means the picture was stolen (this is the unethical part because the photographer is calming something that isn't true), and takes it down. The author then has to prove the picture was indeed licensed, losing income and book rank in the process. Once Amazon gets proof that a license was purchased, it puts the book back. The most a photographer can gain from this is that maybe the author will change the cover anyway (which I have seen).

If you see an image use you don't like, do the honest thing, and find out which agency the image was bought from, and then report it to that agency.  As we've seen in this thread, different agencies have different ideas about what is allowed. Don't assume.

The problem is that there isn't a publisher to contact. Often the author is the publisher and it is impossible to reach him/her. No contact info and often a pseudonym. Amazon is the only place that has the contact info. You cannot find out where the image has been licensed unless you contact Amazon. Misuse of an image is a kind of copyright infringement, but you should of course explain the situation and not claim that the image is stolen.


My question to the agencies were simple. "Can i purhase an image and put it on a cover of a e-book in the erotica genre?
I did not say porn, i only asked about erotica. The answer was crystal clear from most of the agencies. No, that is not allowed. Depositphotos and Alamy were the only agencies that allowed it.

Interesting discussion

However, most people have common sense and know the model on the book cover isn't actually being taken by dinosaurs for sexytimes:

However, most people outwith stock assume that any model has consented to that particular usage - 'most people' don't have a clue about stock and assume that someone turns up 'fully informed' to model for a particular shoot, as with a traditional model agency.

Most of them havent even seen or read the licence terms.

[OT] So imagine how many ELs we're losing. 

Alamy doesn't agree that erotica is pornography and recommend uploading as RM and set "sensitive use" as restriction for future uploads if there is a concern.

Ah, that makes sense, thanks for that extra info; although if an image is RF at another agency, it can't be RM on Alamy, which could be a problem for some contributors.

Anyone know where Alamy's model release is found?

I never agreed to join Deposit Photos even when they sent personal invitations several times. I did this because of their background (suspicious warez sites).
I was just thinking on to change my mind and join them next time they invite me. I am glad I didn't yet.
Thanks for the very useful post Lars!

I ust checked DepositPhoto's licence restrictions, and they say:
"Under NO circumstances can Files be used for the following purposes:
To show a person depicted in the file in sensitive scenarios that could reasonably be considered offensive or unflattering to that person (e.g., related to mental and physical deficits, sexual or implied sexual activity or preferences, crime, physical or mental abuse or ailments)"
http://submit.depositphotos.com/license.html
I'd think then that them allowing the files to be used in certain of the types of titles mentioned in the OP could be asking for legal trouble.

Pornography and sexual or implied sexual activity or preferences are different things, but their licenses says its not allowed in the context you describe in your OP. I would ask for a second opinion or write their legal department.

[email protected]