Inspiring

Answered

Rejection of intellectual property

Forum|Forum|3 years ago
May 27, 2022
3 replies
1325 views

Hello!

The other day I uploaded a couple of files of the Seville Tower but they have been rejected for intellectual property. I have been researching and this building does not have any copyright as may be the case with many buildings in the city of Paris for example. So what is the problem?

I would like someone to help me to solve this doubt.

Thanks.

Troubleshooting

This topic has been closed for replies.

Correct answer George_F

The exact thinking of the reviewers is something that we will never know. Adobe may very well just have a general policy of "buildings that are the main subject and identifiable need a property release". Protecting themselves from a lawsuit is more valuable than any one asset. I follow the same principle personally, and there are assets I probably could submit as commercial that I still keep as editorial use only. I hope that at least helps highlight a potential line of thinking that Adobe may have.

Cheers!

RALPH_L

Community Expert

As long as the structure is fairly new (last 100 years or so) and is the focus of attention in your photo, you need a release form.

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

You're attempting to sell a picture commercially. The high rise has no other buildings around it and is easily identifiable. Don't you think the architects, builders and property owners have rights to refuse you permission to do that?

If I took a picture of your home and sold it to an advertising agency, how would you feel about that? Would you be pleased to see your home on a billboard ad or side of a bus without your permission?

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

davidtaphotographyAuthor

Inspiring

Hi Nancy, thank you for responding.

I see that you have not quite understood what this building is. This building is a public place where anyone can enter and where, inside, there are several stores. Obviously, I will never upload a photo of a private building like a house. So your answer has nothing to do with my problem.

Regards.

T

Test Screen Name

Legend

I think you have not understood Adobe's rules. Almost all buildings are in public places, where you stand to make a picture does not change Adobe's rules. Having stores does not change Adobe's rules. Being an entirely legal shot in your country does not change Adobe's rules. There is no appeal, there are only the rules, which are made only for Adobe's convenience, not ours...

T

Test Screen Name

Legend

Adobe's rule is you will need a signed release. This does not change by country, they do not know every building in the world.

davidtaphotographyAuthor

Inspiring

Hello, thank you for your reply

I already know the rule, what I do not understand is why I am required to have an authorization when this building does not have any type of restriction or is protected by anything. I do not understand why I am asked for these photographs in particular and previously, with other photos of buildings that I have uploaded, I have never been asked for anything, except in Paris, which I accepted since the buildings are protected.

I still don't know the reason why I'm being rejected.

George_F

Correct answer

Community Expert

The exact thinking of the reviewers is something that we will never know. Adobe may very well just have a general policy of "buildings that are the main subject and identifiable need a property release". Protecting themselves from a lawsuit is more valuable than any one asset. I follow the same principle personally, and there are assets I probably could submit as commercial that I still keep as editorial use only. I hope that at least helps highlight a potential line of thinking that Adobe may have.

Cheers!

George F, Photographer & 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