We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.
I’d like to know why this photo hasn’t been refused for the violation of the Intellectual Property Code reason ?
I had the same problem with photo of Paris few days ago.
I don‘t really know how to do to see this photo accepted.
In general, what is the problem with this kind of photo ?
Thank you for your answer
I can understand your confusion seeing an image like yours accepted while yours was rejected for intellectual reason. Intellectual violation means you need to get property release signed and submitted before Adobe will accept your image. That is the guideline from now and onwards. Adobe acquired Fotolia with portfolio having images that do not comply to the current regulations. These images will be completely removed in time. Regulations do change over time based on experience and observations, therefore the focus should be on current regulation to go foward. You may find the following discussion interesting and informative:
Thank's for your reply.
So if I understand, when I want a sell a photo like this one, I have to fill out the Property Release Checklist ?
But how can I do to send the form and how can I do to see my photos accepted ?
Thank you very much.
To start with, you need to go through the guidelines regarding accepted images to make sure Adobe will accept your image at all.
Then you will need to find the owner/person with relevant authority to permit submission; to have them complete and sign a release form https://helpx.adobe.com/pdf/stock/property/Releases-en.pdf or use the Adobe sign tool on the portal. You will then submit the form attached to the image as the steps at プロパティリリース (Instruction in English).
I hope this answers your question.
Thank you very much for your reply.
One last thing, how should i fill out the form if the pictures belongs to me ?
I don't really understand how to proceed.. Sorry I'm new on this process.
Also, do I have to fill one form for each pictures refused for this reason ?
Thank you very much.
You should be the photographer for all photos uploaded to Adobe. Therefore you would be the owner of all photos submitted. This is according to the terms and condition of use.
When completing the form, you need to do so in the presence of a witness.
Photos you take of your own property (for example your house) that would require property release you would fill out the form as the property owner, your signature, write your name out, write your name as the owner (or just write as above), your full address, telephone number, e-mail and date, then the address of the property (where the house is at). You are the photographer, hence referred to as the author, therefore you sign as author, write your full name again and date. The witness will next sign, write his or her name out and date (witness date and your signature date must correspond). In the next line you write the description of the property and date. At the top left you need to secure a printed image of the property (in our example, your house. Be sure to check the box as owner.
If the owner of the property of which you take the photo is someone else, (John Brown) his name would be at the top as owner, followed by his signature, his name written out in full, and his name as owner (or you could put "as above"). Following would be his and contact information. You would check the box as owner John Brown being the owner. You would then fill in where the property is at. Below would be your personal information, your signature as the artist (photographer), your name date, then witness info (signature, name and date, then a description of the place of the image, and date of recording. Again at the top left you fix a copy of the image and scan to submit.
If a representative of the owner is the one giving permission to submit image of property, his name comes first, followed by his signature, and his name in full. The owner of the property name will follow, and following as above. Check the authorized Rep check box.
I hope this helps.
All right, I understand very well ! Thank you very much for your brillant explanations.
One last thing, taking the exemple I mentioned first. The Sydney Opera house photo.
I took the photo, I'm the owner of it. I took the photo from a public space, and the opera is now in public domain.
How do I have to fil this form in that case ?
I fill out the form as the owner and the artist, but not sure it suits in that case.
Below, a screenshot on how I fill out the form in my case.
<IMAGE REMOVED BY MODERATOR>
Except you are the owner of the Sydney Opera House, you cannot sign as owner. Property owner in this case means the person who has the title for the property (eg land title - land owner) or entitled to the property. If you are not the owner of the property of which you take the photograph of, you will have to find the owner to fill in and sign the owner's section of the form.
You the photographer is the artist. You sign the artist section. of the form.
Even though you took this image from a public space, the Sydney Opera House is isolated. You did not take it as a part of the cityscape, but as an individual building. If you did take it as a part of the city scape as in the example under "Architecture", "Sydney Opera House" at Known image restrictions , then you'd not need a release. Click on "Sydney Opera House to see the example".
I hope this was helpful
Architectural pictures have 3 owners depending on the situation:
However, if the picture is showing a skyline you will be the only owner of the (c) and there will be no other restrictions. Please note that also the use of some keywords may lead to ip refusal as well as logos and things like that.
I find that Adobe Stock is inconsistent in Their application. For example I did a search for images on the Western wall in Israel. Found images, looked at them, Checked them against mine, Some where similar, overall concept the same/ I submitted mine and it was rejected for property violation. I had other landmarks accepted. Just wandering who can claim other rights on ancient heritage sites. Architect is dead, builder is dead, and the site belongs to the people, such as the Western wall, The original poster already mentioned the bridge is public domain
Without seeing the picture, you cannot get an answer.
In general, any logo in the picture will get you a refusal.
Please post the link and/or pictures of which you speak of, so we can understand your comparison, and of what you speak.