Most sellers spend their worry budget on lighting, backgrounds and pixel dimensions. Almost nobody thinks about who actually owns the photo they just uploaded. That is a mistake, because an image copyright complaint does not politely ask you to swap a file. It suppresses the listing, sometimes the whole account, and it usually arrives without warning.
This guide covers the four situations that catch out e-commerce sellers most often: using supplier photos, using stock images, having your own photos stolen, and the new AI disclosure rules landing in August 2026.
The default rule: the photographer owns the photo
Copyright in a photograph exists the moment the shutter fires. There is no form to file, no notice to add, no registration required. The person who pressed the button owns it, unless a written agreement moved that ownership somewhere else.
Three consequences fall out of that, and all three surprise people:
- Selling the product does not transfer the photo rights. A brand can happily sell you 200 units and still object to you using their catalogue images.
- Hiring a photographer does not automatically make you the owner. In many jurisdictions you get a licence to use the images, not the copyright itself, unless the contract says otherwise.
- Findability is not permission. An image being freely downloadable from Google, a supplier's website, or a shared product database creates no implied licence whatsoever.
In the United States, statutory damages for wilful infringement run up to US$150,000 per work. Most disputes settle far below that, but the number explains why demand letters get taken seriously.
Using supplier and manufacturer photos
This is the single most common grey area, especially for dropshippers, distributors and multi-brand retailers. The good news: many brands actively want you to use their imagery, and provide it through a dealer portal or media kit. The bad news: sellers routinely assume that permission exists when it has never been granted.
Get it in writing, and keep the writing
A one-line email reply saying "yes, you may use our product images on your listings" is worth more than a verbal agreement from a sales rep who leaves the company next year. Save it. When a marketplace asks you to prove authorisation during a copyright dispute, that email is your entire defence.
Ask specifically about scope. Permission for your own website does not automatically extend to Amazon, Shopee, Lazada or paid social ads. The questions worth asking upfront:
- Which channels are covered — own site, marketplaces, advertising?
- May the images be cropped, resized, or have text or badges added?
- Does permission expire, or end when the dealer relationship ends?
- Are lifestyle and model images covered, or only plain product shots?
The dropshipping trap
Images pulled from AliExpress, 1688 or a supplier's catalogue are frequently not owned by that supplier either. They may have been lifted from the original brand, from a Western retailer, or from a stock library under a licence that does not permit resale use. When the true owner files a complaint, the platform does not investigate the chain — it removes your listing and you carry the strike.
Stock photos: the licence type matters more than the price
Stock imagery is safe to use, right up until it is not. The failure mode is almost always using an editorial image commercially.
| Licence type | What it allows | Typical e-commerce fit |
|---|---|---|
| Royalty-free (RF) | One-off fee, unlimited use over time, non-exclusive | Good for lifestyle and background imagery. Around US$10-50 per high-resolution image. |
| Rights-managed (RM) | Licensed for a defined use, duration and territory; exclusivity purchasable | Campaign hero imagery where you do not want a competitor using the same shot |
| Extended licence | Adds derivative and resale-product rights, usually with unit caps | Required if the image is printed onto the item you sell — mugs, tees, posters |
| Editorial only | News and commentary use exclusively | Never use on a product listing or advert. Contains logos, brands, recognisable people or private property without releases. |
The practical test for commercial use: if a real, identifiable person appears, there must be a signed model release. If recognisable private property or trademarked branding appears, there must be a property or brand clearance. A cheerful stock photo of someone using a phone is fine only because the library obtained that release.
Print-on-demand sellers should read the extended licence terms with unusual care. Standard royalty-free almost never covers putting the image on the product itself.
When someone steals your photos
Original product photography is one of the few genuine moats a small seller has, so it gets copied constantly. You do have a remedy.
Both Amazon and eBay run DMCA-style takedown processes. eBay typically investigates and removes infringing listings within 24 to 72 hours of a properly submitted notice, and issues a strike to the offending seller. Amazon acts quickly too, because prompt removal is what preserves its own safe-harbour protection.
To make a takedown stick, you need evidence of ownership. Keep:
- The original RAW or camera-native files, with EXIF data intact, stored somewhere permanent
- Dated invoices if you paid a photographer, plus the contract assigning rights
- A record of first publication — the date the image went live on your listing
Reverse image search on your own hero shots once a quarter takes about ten minutes and regularly turns up copies. Note that counter-notices exist: a determined infringer can file one, and the dispute then escalates beyond what the platform will resolve.
AI-generated images: the August 2026 deadline
If you use AI to generate or meaningfully modify product imagery and you sell into the European Union, the EU AI Act's Article 50 transparency obligations become fully enforceable on 2 August 2026.
The core requirement is that synthetic images must be marked as artificially generated in a machine-readable format and be detectable as such. A visible label for images is the direction the accompanying Code of Practice has taken. Penalties for non-compliance run to €15 million or 3% of global annual turnover, whichever is higher — aimed primarily at large providers, but the obligations on deployers are real.
Two practical notes. First, this applies to AI-generated and AI-altered imagery, not to ordinary retouching, colour correction or resizing. Cleaning up a background or resizing for a marketplace is not synthetic content. Second, separate from EU law, most marketplaces already prohibit images that misrepresent the product — an AI render showing details the real item does not have is a listing violation regardless of labelling.
A ten-minute compliance audit
Run this over your catalogue once, then whenever you onboard a new supplier:
- List every image source you currently use — own camera, supplier portal, stock library, AI tool, marketplace scrape.
- Delete the scrape category entirely. There is no version of it that is safe.
- For each supplier, find or request written permission and file it in one folder alongside the brand name.
- Check every stock image for editorial-only restrictions, and every print-on-demand design for extended licence coverage.
- Archive your own originals with EXIF intact, backed up off your working machine.
- If you use AI imagery and sell into the EU, plan your labelling approach before 2 August 2026.
- Reverse image search your five best-selling hero shots.
Once the rights question is settled, the remaining work is mechanical: getting each approved image to the right dimensions and file size for every channel you sell on. That part is worth automating — PixelPrep handles batch resizing to marketplace specs, so you are only ever reformatting images you actually have the right to use.
Owning your imagery outright is the cleanest outcome available. It costs a weekend of shooting, it removes the legal exposure completely, and it gives you something to defend rather than something to explain.
This article is general information for e-commerce sellers, not legal advice. Copyright rules vary by country — if you are facing an actual dispute, speak to a qualified lawyer in your jurisdiction.