Licensing landmines, indemnification nightmares, and retroactive license changes. I analyze the terms that can turn your creative project into a legal liability.
Side-by-side comparison of consumer fairness scores across major stock media platforms.
| Platform | Score | Grade | Key Gotcha | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
E
Envato
Best in Category
|
65 | B- | Elements subscription vs individual licenses | View Review → |
|
G
Getty Images
|
58 | C+ | Notorious for copyright trolling | View Review → |
|
A
Adobe Stock
|
52 | C | Creative Cloud integration, clearer terms | View Review → |
|
S
Shutterstock
Lowest in Category
|
45 | C- | Standard licenses, aggressive enforcement | View Review → |
Print runs, impression limits, and seat restrictions can catch users off guard. Exceeding limits may require expensive extended licenses or trigger enforcement actions.
Editorial-only content cannot be used for commercial purposes. Misuse can result in legal liability, model release claims, and takedown demands.
Even licensed content may lack proper model or property releases for certain uses. The buyer often bears liability for improper commercial use.
Platforms shift significant legal risk to buyers through broad indemnification requirements. You may be on your own if a claim arises.
Platforms reserve the right to audit your usage history. Historic license violations can result in demands for back-payment or legal action years later.
Click through for complete analysis of each platform's terms of service.
Received a demand letter from a stock agency? Unsure about your license compliance? We have resources to help you understand your rights and options.
Need help understanding your rights or resolving a licensing dispute?