Old question coming back thanks to current Photodune action…
Photodune is currently soft disabling already approved pictures of building, asking for a property release.
Istock is refusing pictures of “Castles in Europe”
Shutterstock and Fotolia are randomly accepting or rejecting pictures of buildings.
I am afraid they are just taking it easy – “better safe than sorry” way of thinking – instead of trying to properly understand regulations.
In some countries things are less certain. But it seems to me that the situation is quite clear at least in the UK and Germany, and pictures of buildings there should be accepted:Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, Section 62: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/62 Urheberrechtsgesetz, Article 59: http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/urhg/__59.html
As an architect (my other job), I find the German distinction between the building itself (no copies allowed) and its photographic reproduction (allowed) particularly good.
Why don’t they understand? I am willing to respect the law, but should we let them pull our leg and renounce to architectural photography just because they are lazy?
Any opinions on this matter?PS: I started a similar thread at Microstockgroup since other agencies are concerned as well: http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-photography-discussion/panoramafreiheit-%28copyright-designs-and-patents-act-1988-urheberrechtsgesetz%29/msg275805/?topicseen#new
I started a new thread because I didn’t see there’s another similar recent thread here:http://photodune.net/forums/thread/release-for-public-monuments-photographed-from-public-ground/77561
I’ve also had a series of castle photos soft rejected for same reason. This is getting bloody ridiculous.
Over 9000 castle images available for download here on photodune???
So why delete mine?
- Grew a moustache for the Envato Movember competition
- Beta Tester
- Attended a Community Meetup
- Bought between 50 and 99 items
- Contributed a Blog Post
- Has been a member for 3-4 years
- Repeatedly Helped protect Envato Marketplaces against copyright violations
- Was featured in a podcast
Hey guys. Apologies for the delayed reply, but I hope that I can clear this up a little.
We’re currently working on refining our policies for images of several different building types. This is a pretty huge task and it won’t all be done at once, so please bear with us. There are a lot of complicated legal webs that we could tangle ourselves into when it comes to property release forms, right to privacy, public land and other messy things, and every country in the world has a slightly different take on the issue. It’s very difficult to apply a nuanced policy instantly— our reviewers are not legal experts, and can’t verify every country’s laws. There are also legal concepts apart from copyright, which come into play in some countries.
With that in mind, our key focus going forward is to develop simple rules and apply them consistently. These rules are at times going to be a generalisation, which does mean that some images won’t be approved that could be if we had a crack team of experts on every country’s property laws. That’s the unfortunate nature of global stock photography— with such a wide range subject matter, we do have to boil it down to what is practical, achievable, and brings the highest returns to our authors. We don’t want to fall into the trap of having rules that are contradictory, confusing, or are applied inconsistently. Once we’ve conducted a full re-review of the existing PhotoDune library we’ll be publishing the results on the Knowledgebase and applying those guidelines to all new submissions.
If you have any questions about specific images, please feel free to submit a support ticket and request that it be assigned to me.