Hi @leecg – technically you need to license stock photos no matter how they are used. Photographers are businesses as well and we need to support that type of business so that in the future we have high quality but affordable imagery available for business use.  

Getty is suppose to already or will be offering low cost stock options for social media use and of course iStock photos already offers low cost options for stock photos. 

Giving credit to a photographers work should be something is done without question and so should the licensing of imagery. 

Read the license agreement that you got from the stock photo company. If you bought the photo, chances are you can use it unconditionally. Most free stock photo places limit usage to “personal use only.” A business page on Facebook is not “personal use.” Adding the photographer’s name doesn’t make a difference. Again, check the language of the license agreement. Sometimes you need to add a photo credit, sometimes not. It’s always nice to do, but not always necessary.

Hey @leecg … yes as a photojournalist, photo editor and image licenser I may have come across a little strong so I apologize. Can we say it’s my hot button issue?

If you come across any wording that says we are prohibited from stock photo usage, then I am interested in seeing that link out of my own professional interest. 

However until then because you are using the photo for business use then it should be licensed or as you mentioned authorized for use without a licensing fee. 

And now taking my seat and shutting up.

Have a great day, Robin

@robinoshaughnessy no worries, I totally understand and agree I will see if I can find the article and get back to you!
@danielmckean @newsbob Thank you both for your input!

So what about creative commons use? When people list their images specifically under creative commons – using them on facebook or any website wouldn’t be an issue, right? (assuming you use the ‘commercial and deriviate use accepted’ images)