December 15, 2015
Hi, Smithsonian magazine photo contest has a paragraph stating: the entrants give a non-exclusive right royalty-free to the Smithsonian Institute even if they don’t win any prizes. I’m not sure if this is a good idea if I’m trying to get my images contracted to sell and not just be displayed. Is it a good idea to let them be published on their site for publicity purposes for my resume but without getting taken advantage of?
January 8, 2016
Yes, this is a good idea. The legal text supports what the contest is: you choose to submit photos and the Smithsonian can display them (as entrants and winners). The “non-exclusive” part means that you can still sell your images elsewhere. You are not being “taken advantage of”, and getting exposure in the Smithsonian magazine is good for your resume.
October 29, 2014
Hi Andrew, if a marina shot has legible names of boats "only" when zoomed in on 100% viewing, does that mean they can never be sold anywhere because of copyright issues? 123Rf rejected my marina shot for this reason, so I wondered if there’s another avenue to take?
November 3, 2014
No, this does not mean the shot can never be sold anywhere. Having identifiable information can raise privacy issues, but is not necessarily a show-stopper.
Microstock agencies can reject images for any reason. 123RF may be worried about privacy issues of the boat owner, or they may want a property release for identifiable property.
You could get the information removed or obscured in Photoshop.
Submit your comment: