I'm finding something related to the exclusivity agreement a bit confusing.
Consider for example, this image at getty is here:
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/northern-cardinals-on-holly-berries-branch-high-res-stock-photography/EB2511-001Simultaneously, the virtually indistinguishable image is here:
http://gbi.photoshelter.com/image?&_bqG=6&_bqH=eJwrNstzTnJM8nIzLizyzkjyCvXKqPQ2Mqnwjgy0MjQ1tDI0MABhIOkZ7xLsbJucWJSSmZeYU6zmGR8a7BoU7.liGwqSLwpIdckOyw429jdQAyuNd_RzsS1Ri3d0DrEtTk0sSs4AAPhfIPY-&GI_ID=Presumably, when uploading to Getty and PhotoShelter, the copyright owner entered into agreements with Getty and PhotoShelter, and did so in some temporal order. (Moreover, the wording of the current agreements suggest contractual agreements seem to evolve over time.)
The current agreement at PhotoShelter states
Posting. As a Content Provider, you will be entitled to upload, post, distribute or disseminate (collectively, "post") Content (the "Posted Content") on the Site, subject to your Storage Allocation. You hereby grant and agree to grant PhotoShelter a non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully paid up, sublicensable, worldwide right and license to use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, distribute, and create derivative works of the Posted Content solely in connection with Photoshelter's operation, marketing and promotion of the Site. You hereby represent and warrant that you have all rights necessary to grant the Site the rights set forth above. ....
(See
http://www.photoshelter.com/support/terms)
Meanwhile, the Getty PDF linked above states
1.1 License Grant to Getty Images: You grant Getty Images a worldwide, exclusive right to market and sublicense the right to copy, reproduce, display, transmit, broadcast, modify, alter, create derivative works of and publish the whole or part of any Content (as defined below) that you submit to Getty Images. These rights may be exercised via any analog or digital means of communication now known or hereafter devised including without limitation via print, websites, other electronic formats, mobile devices, TV, cinema, exhibitions; and, subject to applicable laws, may be used for any purpose of any nature including without limitation for advertising, publicity, promotions, graphic design, marketing within and on products, corporate communications, press articles, press releases, brochures, reports, décor, programs and films. Getty Images may sublicense or authorize any third party distributors .
It seems to me that the two images I linked are identical. INAL, but it is difficult for me to understand how Getty could have an <i>exclusive</I> agreement to "copy, reproduce, display, transmit, broadcast, modify, alter, create derivative works of and publish the whole or part of"
the image while PhotoShelter simultaneously has
"a non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully paid up, sublicensable, worldwide right and license to use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, distribute, and create derivative works of the Posted Content".
What happens to Getty if they file a suit and it later turns out that someone had obtained the image through the photographer's PhotoShelter store? For that matter, is the mere fact that photographer granted a non-exclusive license to PhotoShelter be a problem for Getty should Getty sue? Could Getty sue the photographer or PhotoShelter for displaying, distributing etc?
INAL, but this is very confusing to me.