Thank you for raising this issue! We’ve checked it over and there really is no limitation for double word tags. I’m very sorry for the inconvenience and will be speaking with the review team to ensure files are not rejected for this reason moving forward.
Great discussion guys, I’d like to quickly clarify a few things.
We do have a copy of VideoCopilot Shockwave that will be used to roughly check against if/when we see a submission that includes an animation which appears to have been taken from Shockwave.
As i see it’s Single License product, it can be included only in personal projects.
This is correct. You’ll need to check with VideoCopilot about licensing specifics, but I do know that animations within Shockwave cannot be used or included as assets within a project file being sold here. Doing so would essentially be reselling the Shockwave assets.
And lastly I’d like to talk about tutorial use. The way things currently work, we do not permit files which appear to be based directly from tutorials. So in the case of the recent VideoCopilot Grid tutorial, files created which are based on this cannot be uploaded. Although it’s worth noting that our review team may not watch every single After Effects tutorial, especially when they’ve only been recently released. So in some cases, a file might make it through our review system and get approved. When this happens, we’re happy to remove infringing files when they are reported by our fantastic community .
We do however allow some use of tutorials within project files. If you were to watch a tutorial that teaches a technique, and using that technique, created your own unique take on it, and work that unique take into a greater project, it would be okay to submit. Remember that the technique you’re including needs to be only a small portion of the greater project. If the technique has been modified slightly to make it look a little different and then sold as the primary aspect of your project file, it may not be accepted, or could even be taken down if it was accepted.
@Creattive, your points have been noted. We actually do have a united team and we’re regularly working to improve this further. The amount of times this happens is rare when compared the number of items processed regularly and we’re actively trying to reduce that number further.
Hey guys, really sorry about this, I realize how frustrating it can be to receive a soft rejection followed up with a hard rejection. Here’s a few things to keep in mind.
For starters, as frustrating as it can be, soft rejections should never be considered a guarantee that your file will be accepted once resubmitted. Yes, if your file does not meet our quality standards from the beginning it should just be a hard rejection from the get-go. But there is some level of subjectivity involved with file reviews. For files that are right on the borderline, it’s very possible that one reviewer may think it’s good and another reviewer may not. Either way, this is something we’re going to be working on in the coming months.
We plan to focus pretty heavily on quality control both within our library and within our review team. What this means for authors is that we’re now working more closely and we’re going to be frequently discussing quality standards as a team to ensure the slight differences in our opinions shrink. I feel like all of the reviewers are on the same page already, but we need to close the small gaps that do exist.
Please join me in welcoming the newest member of the VideoHive team – FluxVFX. Marissa’s been an author here for quite some time, and has a pretty fantastic portfolio.
She’ll be using her wealth of knowledge and experience to help out across all categories eventually, but for the time being her focus will be in the After Effects Projects category. Which should help reduce wait times a bit.
Welcome to the team Marissa!
Sorry for the confusion on this one. I must admit it does fall into a bit of a grey area. In the past the licensing would have prohibited the act of selling one marketplace item within another (if you’re exclusive) as Cyzer pointed out.
But Creattive is correct. According to the recent policy change, authors can include other marketplace items within their own item, so long as they get permission from the author of the other file. In this case, the author of both files is the same. So he’s essentially granting himself permission.
It is a bit confusing, but I’ve spoken with the team to make sure everyone’s aware of this and if you resubmit the file Tredigit, please clearly state in the notes to reviewer field that you own the license to distribute the included audio file and you won’t run into this problem again.