Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Could somebody please explain to me why this photo has been rejected for intellectual property reasons. I have closely scanned it many times and cannot find anything that would violate intellectual property. There are no people, signs, trademarks, or whatever. I just want to know for future reference.
The picture has a huge property as its focus, Vienna Shonbrunn. If we read https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/stock/contributor/help/property-release.html we see "Private homes and buildings: If you’re photographing, filming, or even illustrating a recognizable property you probably need a property release" and "Landmarks and monuments: You may need property releases for images or videos of famous buildings and landmarks. In general, images/videos of historical monuments that are more than 120-years-old
...Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The picture has a huge property as its focus, Vienna Shonbrunn. If we read https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/stock/contributor/help/property-release.html we see "Private homes and buildings: If you’re photographing, filming, or even illustrating a recognizable property you probably need a property release" and "Landmarks and monuments: You may need property releases for images or videos of famous buildings and landmarks. In general, images/videos of historical monuments that are more than 120-years-old don’t require releases. However [specific exceptions]"
Now, you know and I know that the building is over 200 years old, and so this does not apply. I thought at first this might a reviewer being careful, but if we look at https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/stock/contributor/help/known-image-restrictions.html we see that Schonnbrun is specifically listed. If you plan on making trips to photograph buildings or cityscapes for commercial purposes, this is essential reading. You'll find a more detailed discussion on a different stock site: https://wiki.gettyimages.com/castles-in-europe/
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
How do you explain that a number of other photos of Schonbrunn that I submitted were accepted?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Sometimes moderators make an error. Perhaps this one was properly aware of its IP status.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
By the way, it's your responsibility as a contributor to follow the rules, not the reviewer's responsibility to detect every breach of them. Since property release is needed, purchasers would be rightly unset to get a lawyer's letter if they used your photo.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You're right! Schonbrunn is indeed listed. I was shocked. What I don't get is how Alamy accepts everything. Don't they have the same issues?