You are torn, battling between selling your stock footage under the rights managed license (RM) or the royalty-free license (RF). You know RM is the trusty reliable license you can count on as it has been around since the concept of stock footage first evolved. RF may be the new kid on the block, but there must be a reason why there are so many microstock footage sites offering them. So which should you choose?

For the uninitiated, here’s a short explanation of the key differences between the two:
Duration of use: RM footage are licensed for a limited amount of time; RF footage can be used for perpetuity.
Cost: RM footage are charged based upon various usage considerations, such as the purpose of production, the size of its audience and the duration of usage; RF footage are charged based upon the format required.

To make the choice between RF versus RM, most people would ask – which license is more profitable?

If this question is posed in a scientific experiment, all things being equal, and only one sale is made, the answer will be clear – RM. Simply because it’s licensing charges is higher than RF.

In reality, it is hard to gauge, as choosing between RM and RF boils down to the age-old business choice between “selling quality” versus “selling quantity”. RM stock footage command a higher licensing charge for their unique content and exclusivity. However, there are fewer buyers as they not only cost more, but are based on complicated usage considerations. The Association of Commercial Stock Image Licensors has attempted to rectify the latter issue with the Licensing Grid, but it is impossible to make it as uncomplicated as RF.

RF footage eliminate the barriers of RM, attracting more buyers. Commonly sold as online instant downloads for perpetual usage, RF stock footage are convenient to buy, flexible to use, and much cheaper. However, their lower pricing make the earnings trickling in seem more like pocket money.
Both licensing models have proven to work, so perhaps the question should not be about which license will make you more money, but rather, what you have and prefer to offer.

Here’s three questions you can ask yourself:

1. What kind of stock footage content do you have?
If they are unique, specialized, difficult to get, then you can consider selling under RM as there is a higher chance people will be willing to pay a higher price for them. If they are generic content that are useful for multiple situations, then sell them as RF as many people would find them useful to buy.

2. How big is your stock footage inventory?
If you have tons of works, you can afford to “sell quantity”. Then it will be better to sell under RF where there is a higher rate of sales, as compared to RM.

3. How much do you love your stock footage?
RM, with all its complicated usage considerations, helps you keep track of who’s using your footage, what they are being used for, when and where they will be used. RF, while still ensuring your copyright to your works, does not provide these form of control.


您感到困惑,正考虑是否以版权管理许可证(RM)或是免版税许可证(RF)出售您的视频素材。您知道RM是相当可靠的,因为它在视频素材这概念刚萌生的时候,就已经存在了。 RF 则是初出茅庐而已。但它必定有其魅力,才会让众多微视频素材网站也开始提供这项服务。那该从何选择?

对于门外汉们,这里有一个简短的说明, 试图区分两者的关键性差异:
版权管理的视频素材,许可权只限于一定的时间; 免版税视频可永久性使用。
版权管理视频的收费得考量各种使用条件,如制作目的、观众规模的大小,和使用期限的长短; 免版税视频的收费,则是根据所要求的格式而定。


如果这问题是提出在科学实验里,那当其他条件是同等的,就只限于一个选择的时候,答案是明确的 – 版权管理视频。原因是因为它的授权费,高于免版税视频。

版权管理视频有较少的买家,不仅因为较高的收费,也因复杂的使用条例。商业视频图像素材许可协会已试图与牌照网格(http://www.acsil.org/news/acsil-launches-the-licensing-grid )一起解决这个问题,但也无法使其程序像免版税视频的一样简单。



如果它们是一般的内容,可用于多种情况,那么您应该以免版税许可证出售。 因为它的多重用途,会引来许多人的购买并使用。
2. 您有多少视频素材?