Video of a cow rejected for violation of intellectual property...

[bgalice]

Strange rejection, I have a video of a cow eating grass in a meadow rejected for violation of intellectual property...

The cow is alone, this is a close up, maybe the reviewer took the orange marks at the ears of the cow for a brand but, seriously this is just a cow nothing more ! What violation of intellectual property could it infringe !

The id of the file is :  167050446

[Ricky336 · Accepted solution]

If the cow is wearing ear tags, it has a number. This number can be identified. In fact, that is how the farmer can identify the cow - by its ear tag. So, this means it can be identified - therefore you need permission. I guess this is why it has been rejected for intellectual property. A cow is property in this respect! Property not only relates to buildings! (This is my guess though).

[MatHayward]

The above answer is correct. The tag identifies the cow as private property. You must submit a property release signed by the owner of the cow to sell this content for commercial licensing.

Kind regards,

Mat Hayward

[bgalice]

This is only partly true, to identify the cow you need to be able to read all ten numbers and only 4 are readable on the video, even after zooming at 200%... Oh and I do know it, these are my father's cows...

Anyways, once again this is only one arbitrary ruling by some anonymous reviewer...

[MatHayward]

No, I'm sorry but it's not an arbitrary rule. The presence of the tag itself identifies the cow as private property and should result in a rejection for IP any time it's even partially visible. The owner (your Father) may be able to identify the tag or the cow by it's color, the location, etc. As a result, a release is required. Fortunately, since it's a family cow that should be a fairly easy fix. More information about our legal guidelines including property releases can be found here: Legal Guidelines for Adobe Stock Contributor program

-Mat