Participant

Question

Audit removal: Incompatible with Terms

Forum|Forum|11 months ago
April 11, 2025
4 replies
1029 views

A photo that has been selling regularly for 6 years was removed from my account today. The removal reason says:

"Audit removal: Incompatible with Terms

This content has been removed for violating Adobe Stock’s content submission guidelines. We have determined that this content is incompatible with the Stock Contributor Terms on the basis of an internal audit. For more information on this policy, why this content was found to be incompatible with the Terms, and your appeals options, please see the Content Submission Guidelines"

Title

Kenai Mountains Reflection Purple Mountains Majesty

Category

Landscapes

Language

English

Keywords (45)

purple, mountains, majesty, kenai mountains, alaska, america, area, blue, chugach national forest, clouds, cloudy, elevation, elevational gradient, forest, green, kenai lake, kenai peninsula, kenai peninsula borough, landscape, meadow, natural, nature, north america, reflection, rocky, seward, shadows, travel, usfs, united states, visit, water, weather, wetland, white, yellow, altitude, foreboding, lake, overcast, riparian, slopes, steep, tourism, tree line

I can't figure out which term or keyword would be potentially a violation fo the submission guidelines. Does anyone have any idea? Is the title "Purple Mountains Majesty" too close to the song lyrics "Purple Mountains Majesties"? Are they upset that I included the acronym for the land management agency, USFS? Do they think this isn't relevant to tourism because I'm showing a place people visit and not actual tourists? Do they not think the clouds are dark enough to be considered foreboding? Upset because technically this is 20 minutes north of Seward?

I've never had an audit removal before and I am confused. Any ideas would be appreciated.

Contributors

V

Viola Dolas

Participant

Here are the most likely scenarios based on the “Audit removal: Incompatible with Terms” explanation:

⸻

1. Title “Purple Mountains Majesty”

Yes, this is the most likely candidate. The phrase “Purple Mountain Majesties” is part of the lyrics of the official patriotic song America the Beautiful. Using this expression can be interpreted as a copyright violation or unauthorized use of culturally significant content — even if it seems absurd, such removals are not uncommon in automated or overly cautious audits. Especially if a reviewer interpreted it as misleading due to its association with the song.

⸻

2. Mention of “USFS” (United States Forest Service)

Adobe Stock prohibits the use of abbreviations related to government agencies, especially without a clear editorial license. Even if the forest is actually managed by the USFS, their policy is strict. It’s better to use “national forest” without specifics. This is the second most likely reason.

⸻

3. Keywords like “foreboding”, “tourism”, “visit”

Foreboding is a subjective and abstract word — not recommended.
Tourism and visit can raise flags if the image does not show people, infrastructure, or visual indicators of tourism.

⸻

4. Overly broad or inaccurate geotags

For example, if the location is tagged as “Seward” but the actual spot is 20 minutes north, Adobe may flag this as a geographic mismatch.
Keywords like “America”, “North America”, or “United States” are overly broad and can be interpreted as attempts to game the system with irrelevant tags.

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

"Purple mountain majesties" refers to Pikes Peak, Colorado— the inspiration for the poem that later became a song. Katherine Lee Bates wrote her poem, "America the Beautiful" in 1893 while visiting Colorado Springs and climbing Pikes Peak.

Using "Purple Mountain Majesty" in your title might give customers a false impression that your image is depicting something it's not.

Adobe is being extra vigilant about public brand perception & protecting property. They have to.

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ansel-adams-adobe-ai-images-2496092

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

G

GRPImagery

Known Participant

First, I love that spot and your capture is beautiful. The "Incompatible with Terms" violation is so non specific its really impossible to know. I too have several photos taken down with the same violation and after some research, discoverd that all the photos with "Incompatible with Terms" were actually duplicates that I mistakenly uploaded a second time.

Abambo

Community Expert

I would guess that it is indeed the title: Purple Mountains Majesty.

Resubmit and call it Paris Eiffel Tower. According to an Adobe employee, there is nothing wrong with misleading titles, well at least for generative AI places.

(I suppose you catch the irony)

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Jill_C

Community Expert

I don't see any offensive or disallowed keywords in your list, though some of them aren't particularly useful such as "Kenai peninsula borough". I don't think the phrase "purple mountains majesty" is protected, but I also can't imagine a Buyer searching on such a term. You could try resubmitting without that phrase in the title.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

G

gentilcordAuthor

Participant

Thank you for your response.

The photo was indeed taken within the Kenai Penisula Borough of Alaska and the view shows exclusively land within the Kenai Penisula Borough. I generally include terms for the county/borough, state, and country for landscapes.

My concept for this photo was that purple mountains, while being a iconic American landscape descriptor, were not as often illustrated. Images with patriotic themes have always sold well for me and this one was no different...until it was removed.

I'm not going to risk my account by resubmitting when they have not given me an understandable reason for rejection. I don't want to guess the removal reason wrong and get another strike. I strive to always abide by the Content Submission Guidelines, but for the last month or two I believe I know longer understand them. There has obviously been a major policy shift. Removal of previously accepted images is proof of that. But the language of the Content Submission Guidelines has not had a similar overhaul. It makes complaince and understanding difficult.

Jill_C

Community Expert

I understand your reticence to resubmit the image. I have actually stopped any new submissions after my long-held ~5% rejection rate ballooned to 40%. Adobe is rejecting a lot of perfectly acceptable assets these days, and no one seems to know why. Adobe has been silent on any changes in their reviewing process.

Jill C., Forum Volunteer

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded