• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers

I'm confused - original modeled and rendered abstract images refused acceptance for IP violation.

Participant ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I had submitted four original images that I had modeled and rendered - all four were refused at the same time and for the same reason - "Intellectual Property Refusal."  There are no recognizable protected images or descriptions .. The images are attached.  How can these be IP violations?  To add to the confusion - the last image has a "sister" image I did that is similar (same model, same lighting but with outward radiating waves instead of turbulent waves) that was already accepted.  How do I fix this and prevent it in the future?

 

Confused...

TOPICS
Contributor critique , Contributors , Troubleshooting

Views

256

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

If you are the original creator, submit a property release as suggested in the manual. How can the moderator know tgat the creation is yours. And how can Adobe prove tgat, when the buyer gets attacked in the courts. 

 

Read the contributors nanual for more information. If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Adendum: The "sister" image has been accepted, because hunans take the decision. That moderator was probably persuaded, that the creation was yours. But only a property release can get the required confirmation.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks for the quick reply!

 

Let me make sure I understand this. 

 

The moderator / reviewer was not convinced that these are my images and my IP - and I need to submit a property release to get past this?  If that were the case - should I be doing this for every image I submit from now on?  I completely understand the need to cover all the bases legally, but wondering why I am facing this pushback now after all the prior images I have submitted and subsequently were accepted without this.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

As moderation is done by humans, within limits, you may expect different decisions, depending on many factors you can't influence. Yes, you should submit a property release for each of your creations. It may be, that they pass without, but you won't get IP related issues, when you do. Just sign as both, artist and owner, and you're done.

 

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Understand (and even would expect) that reviews could be inconsistent due to different moderators and such - but somehow IP matters would seem to me to be a bit more cut and dry - particularly with images likes these that clearly have no offending material.. but your explanation is the only thing that makes any sense - and as I have read just about everywhere on this board - Adobe makes the rules..

 

Either that or it is just an understandable mistake... 

 

The Adobe users guide provdes these examples of submissions that would need a property release:

 

 

  • Famous landmarks, historic locations, and modern architecture 
  • Copyrighted works like art, books, maps, and fictional characters 
  • Identifiable exteriors or interiors of private homes and buildings 
  • Distinctive product shapes like toys, bottles, luxury furniture, vehicles, and airplanes 
  • Unique animals, such as race horses, famous pets, and certain zoo animals 
  • Properties with photography policies, which may include stadiums, museums, concert venues, and amusement parks 

 

 

BlueAndGrayPaperContours.jpg

Given those guidelines, and the submitted image above of a fictitious landscape that I modeled - I'm inclined to think that if this requires a property release then Adobe should be providing guidance that every image submitted needs a property release - because that's what I'm now inclined to think.

 

Thanks again for the information and quick responses - Still somewhat confused but I'll resubmit them with the property releases and we shall see how it goes.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Your creations fall under your point 2: 

  • Copyrighted works like art, books, maps, and fictional characters 

I suppose, it's easier for moderators to handle standard photos than 3D renders consistently. 

 

I also suppose that you wont need an individual property release for each render, but only one for each series, or even only one general.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I was thinking about this a bit more and I think you have hit on it (at least I hope that's it).  I don't envy the reviewers job at all - but at the same time it's a bit frustrating to be mass denied based on (false) suspicions that you are submitting someone elses IP. Those images took a lot of time to create!

 

Perhaps if there was a checkbox on the submittal that indicated the image is a 3d render and submitter is the artist - it might facilitate the reviewer's job. 

 

As the software and hardware gets more and more sophistacted - I think the volume and quality of 3d renders is only going to grow - so it would make sense to use modified criteria when it comes to renders.

 

Speaking of which - do you know if Adobe has started to plan how AI generated render art will be handled in terms of stock submissions?  We are seemingly on the cusp of having tools like Dall-e and Google Imagen that create "artwork" from simple textual descriptions.  Not sure if this type of technology will be a facilitator or a competitor.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"at the same time it's a bit frustrating to be mass denied based on (false) suspicions that you are submitting someone elses IP" No, that's not it at all. The fact is, these reviewers identified it as something IP. If it's your IP you just have to tell them, and to tell them you use an IP release. This makes a submittor legally liable if it turns out to be otherwise (sadly, Adobe have to protect themselves against this). So there is nothing unusual or weird about submitting an IP release for your own work.  It's required, and every artist needs to do it every time. It's a pity some moderators aren't doing this properly.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied


@DarkClearSky wrote:

I was thinking about this a bit more and I think you have hit on it (at least I hope that's it).  I don't envy the reviewers job at all - but at the same time it's a bit frustrating to be mass denied based on (false) suspicions that you are submitting someone elses IP. Those images took a lot of time to create!

 


I would find it much more frustrating finding my models as a render submitted to Adobe stock, without my knowledge. And it would be frustrating for Adobe and the customers to remove those assets on notice. 

 

And yes, a refusal is always frustrating. 

 

How does the IP law consider AI generated items? That's the really interesting question.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Very much appreciate the responses.  I'm new to this, still learning the production, legal, and business end of this while trying to grow a portfolio based on this technology - and also foster a new hobby.  The patience is appreciated. 

 

The Adobe material release form is intended for the release of someone other than the artist ("the owner") IP being assigned to the submitting artists creation.  As creator and owner-assigner to myself - I've been advised to sign as both owner and artist to get past this.  I get that as a solution - but this solution is confusing as this is not the intention of that legal form. The release of my IP rights (under terms) to Adobe is already expressed in the Adobe stock contributor agreement in section 3.1.  An IP rejection at this phase implies that the reviewer doesn't believe I have these rights to grant with that image.

 

If the contributor agreement is not sufficient for Adobe's legal concerns in this situation - why not have a specific release form for an artist releasing his own IP for consideration into stock?  ... and why not require that for all submissions?  Again - I had thought that was a feature of the contributors agreement. 

 

My big issue here is that I'm still left not knowing when to submit that form and when its not necessary (other than wait for a submission to be rejected due to IP violation).

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

All four images resubmitted with property releases assigning my ownership to myself.

 

Let's see how this goes.

 

As always - thanks for the advice!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

That's the way it should be. Good luck.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Una de las cosas que pudo haber pasado es que las 4 imagenes son iguales si subes varias fotos y todas tienen el mismo patrón no te la van a aceptar.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 01, 2022 Jul 01, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks but the images were distinct - although three of them had the same "theme."

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied


@davidanlinares wrote:

Una de las cosas que pudo haber pasado es que las 4 imagenes son iguales si subes varias fotos y todas tienen el mismo patrón no te la van a aceptar.


La razón de la denegación aquí no son las presentaciones duplicadas, sino los derechos de propiedad intelectual. Esas son denegaciones diferentes.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'd be inclined to agree about the initial contract being enough - except that I've spent a lot of time looking at aspiring photos in this forum. Perhaps a third of them have an IP violation, maybe more; many people seem to assume that if they can photograph it, they own all rights to the photo. I've seen photos of so many kinds of IP: shopfronts, cars, complete posters, graffiti, toys, coffee cups, Christmas decorations, the Eiffel Tower by night, boats, planes, sneakers, , museum interiors, tee shirts, books, icons, screenshots from games... Some people may also try to sell work made from downloaded models which they rendered, but did not create, or which are a composition including parts of other people's models.... So requiring IP releases may be a necessary layer of protection. Adobe know all about how not to get sued; a big target like them no doubt needs a large legal team.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This does appear to be the situation (large percent of inadvertent submission policy violations).  To add to that - Adobe's policies appear to steer clear of even "fair use" of IP contained in an image - unless editorial.  Guessing this approach is to simplify the submission rules as well as avoid any remote possibility of a challenge even if it is defensible - you still have to pay to defend it.  For non-exclusive content, might as well be strict.

 

If Adobe has a large legal team (and I'm sure they do) and they are interested in bolstering the contributor agreement - they need to provide a specific form for the resposible artist to release their IP as the sole owner of the material.  That material release form is like using a set of pliers as a wrench... and I still don't know when it applies and when it is not needed in my situation with these renders.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You, as the artist, have to submit an IP release.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Is there a way to create a single blanket release for a series of images that contain the same IP elements?

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

quote

Is there a way to create a single blanket release for a series of images that contain the same IP elements?


By @DarkClearSky

The first three would be OK with the same reference. If you include the second reference too, you could work with one release assigned to all variants.

 

In addition, you can prepare a property release prefilled with your data, where you just need to add the dates and the reference.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 02, 2022 Jul 02, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Sorry - just a few more questions..

 

Assuming a blanket release, what would you use for the property visual?  I made separate releases for those four recent submissions just to make sure - but having a blanket release would make this at least a little easier.

 

Is the recommendation here that I associate a property release form for every single submission from here on in..?  Again - I'm totally new to this - just getting started, I've had 34 images accepted so far that I've rendered using the exact same processes and tools (based on the direction of the contributors user's guide) and these are the first ones to raise this type of issue.  What is the accepted and consistent process?

 

Thanks again..

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jul 03, 2022 Jul 03, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

As I said, the first three images would surely pass with ONE release. Others may pass too. A blanket release is where you only need to add the dates and the reference (one image for a series of similar ones) and then upload as a release. Your personal data is always the same, so there is no need to add that each time. 

 

You need to find out what passes. It may well be that all you need is ONLY one release, it may be that you will need a couple of releases. Just try it. 

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Jul 07, 2022 Jul 07, 2022

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

Update - all four images were accepted this morning.  Thanks for the assistance!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines