Intellectual Property Rejection

[SvetlanaDSF]

Hello, I'm hoping someone can help me figure out why a bunch of my urban skyline photos got rejected for "intellectual property" reasons and what I can do about it. It is clearly stated in Adobe documentation that skylines are acceptable when the building is not a sole focus:

1. Property release and protection guidelines for Adobe Stock​:

When you don’t need a release

Not all property photos require releases. If your content feature generic houses and interiors that don’t have any identifiable features, you’re in the clear.

The same applies to generic street scenes or cityscapes.

Broad cityscapes, such as the one below, that don’t have a single point of focus don’t require property releases. But if you single out a building as the main subject of the photograph, you need a release. 

2. Known image restrictions :

CITYSCAPE

Photos of the named subject are unacceptable for commercial use. Cityscape, skyline, or vista photos may be acceptable if no single building is the primary subject.

Here are examples of my photos that were rejected:

How can I get these approved, considering they meet all the Adobe requirements?

[Abambo]

IP rejections means also that no logos are visible. Your pictures are great, congratilations on them, but at the very first inspection I saw this:

Things like that will result in a rejection if the moderator is persuadet that it is a company name, logo or similar. Also if your keywords contain trademarks, you will get a refusal.

[SvetlanaDSF]

Abambo​, thanks for the compliment and the reply!

I do know that there is the name of the stadium present in the photos. My point is that it's not supposed to be required to remove it, or obtain a release, since it's part of the skyline photo, which seems to be clearly described in the requirements.

I have a feeling that these few photos (along with those I didn't post) got reviewed by someone, who was too far on the cautious side. I have several that were approved in the same batch, with no issues, and they also had the stadium in them. Similar to how all my of other cityscapes are usually approved. I never remove logos. And I know that Adobe won't accept a single building without a release, but the skyline photo meets their IP guidelines...

What I'm trying to understand is what is our escalation path for when we disagree with the results of a review? I don't know of one. I resubmitted these, but I don't think that's the right way to do it.

[Abambo · Accepted solution]

IP rejections are also, when there is a logo visible in the image. That's a condition independent from the skyline. It may be that some pictures pass, some do not pass because the moderator is a different one or the moderator sees on one picture the logo and on a different oversees it. As it is a human checking, there will be discrepancies from time to time.If your cityscapes get approved with logos in you are lucky... They may however be removed later on by a future review.

There is no real escalation procedure. Just remove the logo and resubmit.

The only escalation path that exists is posting here and asking advice from your peers.

Please update if you need further help.

[SvetlanaDSF]

Ok, we shall see what happens then. Thanks for your help