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 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/
How do you explain that a number of other photos of Schonbrunn that I submitted were accepted?
Sometimes moderators make an error. Perhaps this one was properly aware of its IP status.
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.
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?