Full Version: Editorial vs Standard License
Can somebody please explain the difference between the two licensing types? I am looking for a layman's version if possible. It sounds as though the editorial one is only for ‘news’ type uses, making them unusable for vfx work. Is that the case?
The Standard and Editorial license types are the norm for any kind of royalty free media sale.
Basically, editorial licenses limit the use of the content (assets, in this case) to editorial purposes. Like you said, this implies news-related or public interest materials. These assets cannot be used for commercially, whether it is for- or non-profit, which includes most VFX work.
The biggest issue here is that we set all our assets to editorial licenses by mistake. We have now fixed this. To clarify, all SideFX assets are now using the Standard License.
Authors are free to upload assets with the Editorial License, and there are some cases where this is necessary. Most of these cases apply to stock photography and won't be relevant to Orbolt assets, but if an author does not own the intellectual property rights to all content within an asset, they cannot use the Standard License. For example, assets that include a logo which was not cleared by the intellectual property rights' holders or include the likeness of someone without a signed model release would require an Editorial License. It is advisable for authors to check with their lawyers if they are unsure of what license to use.
But hopefully the switch to Standard Licenses should answer most of your questions.
If you have any other concerns, let me know.
Basically, editorial licenses limit the use of the content (assets, in this case) to editorial purposes. Like you said, this implies news-related or public interest materials. These assets cannot be used for commercially, whether it is for- or non-profit, which includes most VFX work.
The biggest issue here is that we set all our assets to editorial licenses by mistake. We have now fixed this. To clarify, all SideFX assets are now using the Standard License.
Authors are free to upload assets with the Editorial License, and there are some cases where this is necessary. Most of these cases apply to stock photography and won't be relevant to Orbolt assets, but if an author does not own the intellectual property rights to all content within an asset, they cannot use the Standard License. For example, assets that include a logo which was not cleared by the intellectual property rights' holders or include the likeness of someone without a signed model release would require an Editorial License. It is advisable for authors to check with their lawyers if they are unsure of what license to use.
But hopefully the switch to Standard Licenses should answer most of your questions.
If you have any other concerns, let me know.
nbush
But hopefully the switch to Standard Licenses should answer most of your questions.
Yeah that pretty much sums up everything there. lol Thanks.
