I am frequently asked the question which is used as the title of the article, like ... why this image can only be licensed for editorial use? Is it possible to use it on a commercial WEB site? ... Below is a typical answer to it, which in its principle applies to any of my images, the image that was in the particular question is shown above.
This image had to be submitted as editorial to iStock due to the legal madness practiced by stock photo agencies. Theoretically, the name "Titlis Cliff Walk" can already be considered by them as a trade mark and in such a case it may not be used in the description of a commercial image. Aside from that, there can be some shields bearing some text on the right side of the image, which also may not appear in an image being submitted as a commercial one. The tendency is that it is not impossible if an image will not be accepted if the stock inspection finds some letters on the head of some bolt used in a large construction, etc.
Thus, this image was submitted to iStock as an editorial one, not because of my personal wish, but to obey the rules of the agency.
I personally have no objections against commercial use of this image, as long as I assume no any responsibility for any harm it can cause to anyone.
The same principle applies to any of my images.
However, if an image is licensed through a stock photo agency, one has to obey the terms and conditions of the license obtained there.
Possible workaround: one can obtain the image and the rights for its usage for the desired purpose from me directly.
In my archive the processed images are stored as 8 Bits per Channel TIFF files, which brings a certain advantage compared to JPEG files used in stock agencies. My workflow always starts with RAW files, which are available for most of my published images and practically always available for the newer ones. On the on demand basis, a RAW image can be processed again and the result can be delivered as, for instance, a 16 Bits per Channel ProPhoto RGB image, which can provide considerable advantage compared to JPEG files in the certain usage scenarios.
Notice: in my opinion, if an image is supposed to be used as an abstract header for a WEB page, then its licensing should allow commercial use. However, if the image is supposed to be used as an illustration to some article on a related matter, an editorial license should be sufficient. Still, this is a personal opinion, with no warranty whatsoever.