| Author |
Message |
colinbrothwood
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 11
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 5:11 am
|  |
I had a few images of a set of clowns that I own refused. I can understand the reasons given except that one of the reasons is that ‘Trademark--Contains potential trademark or copyright infringement.’ Can anyone explain why these objects would infringe copy right. I had two other pictures also refuse with 2 other clowns.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
135.78 KB |
| Viewed: |
958 Time(s) |
|
|
|
hhltdave5
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 24065
Location: Our Stock, Food & Portrait photography books at www.rindersmithphotography.com
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:18 am
| |
Copyright and trademark infringement has become a very touchy thing for Shutterstock and other stock sites. It all comes down to reducing the possibility of potential litigation for using an image of a person or specific property for financial gain. The more unique the object is the more likely it will be rejected for this reason.
Just because you have purchased something does not always allow you to make money from that object. The thinking behind it is that the company or person who owns the copyright has the right to determine how the product is displayed or promoted.
|
|
mattgibson
Joined: 11 Nov 2009
Posts: 601
Location: London
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:47 am
| |
Put it another....
You take a picture, you own the copyright to the image. How would you feel if someone started selling it without your permission? You would at least want the income from it wouldn't you? Or perhaps even the right to say how and when it is sold considering it is your image?
That's copyright. It is not always about who owns an item, it is about who created the design and elements used.
If you buy a Ford car you do not have the right to start producing Ford cars just becasue you own one.
|
|
colinbrothwood
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 11
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:00 am
| |
Thank you for your response and your explanation of copy right, which would put my mind at easy except for the fact that with a search there are a number of images of these clown dolls which have all ready been accepted as suitable.
|
|
hhltdave5
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 24065
Location: Our Stock, Food & Portrait photography books at www.rindersmithphotography.com
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:15 am
| |
| colinbrothwood wrote: | | Thank you for your response and your explanation of copy right, which would put my mind at easy except for the fact that with a search there are a number of images of these clown dolls which have all ready been accepted as suitable. |
Policies for stock sites change from time to time. What was acceptable before may not be acceptable now. There were many who had images removed when copyrights were given more attention and the policies tightened.
|
|
digigandalf
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 5404
Location: Twinsburg, OH
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:17 am
| |
| colinbrothwood wrote: | | Thank you for your response and your explanation of copy right, which would put my mind at easy except for the fact that with a search there are a number of images of these clown dolls which have all ready been accepted as suitable. |
We've all gone through that as well. Things that used to be accepted are now prohibited; the restrictions get progressively tighter as fears of litigation increase.
And there's the matter that one reviewer may err more on the side of caution than another would.
|
|
colinbrothwood
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 11
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:19 am
| |
| hhltdave5 wrote: | | colinbrothwood wrote: | | Thank you for your response and your explanation of copy right, which would put my mind at easy except for the fact that with a search there are a number of images of these clown dolls which have all ready been accepted as suitable. |
Policies for stock sites change from time to time. What was acceptable before may not be acceptable now. There were many who had images removed when copyrights were given more attention and the policies tightened. |
The images i mention are images which are still avalible.
|
|
jhuls
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 1046
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:55 am
| |
| colinbrothwood wrote: | | hhltdave5 wrote: | | colinbrothwood wrote: | | Thank you for your response and your explanation of copy right, which would put my mind at easy except for the fact that with a search there are a number of images of these clown dolls which have all ready been accepted as suitable. |
Policies for stock sites change from time to time. What was acceptable before may not be acceptable now. There were many who had images removed when copyrights were given more attention and the policies tightened. |
The images i mention are images which are still avalible. |
It doesn't matter, shutterstock just hasn't gotten around to taking all of them down. Eventually they will get around to it but in the mean time they do not take any new photographs of copyrighted subjects.
|
|
colinbrothwood
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 11
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:57 am
| |
| Quote: | | It doesn't matter, shutterstock just hasn't gotten around to taking all of them down. Eventually they will get around to it but in the mean time they do not take any new photographs of copyrighted subjects. |
That lets me more easily understand the rejection.
|
|
colinbrothwood
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 11
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 8:19 am
| |
| colinbrothwood wrote: | | Quote: | | It doesn't matter, shutterstock just hasn't gotten around to taking all of them down. Eventually they will get around to it but in the mean time they do not take any new photographs of copyrighted subjects. |
That lets me more easily understand the rejection. |
Will this mean that if those pictures are down loaded that the money will go to the copyright holder and not to shutterstock?
|
|
smileus
Joined: 07 Oct 2008
Posts: 585
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 10:04 am
| |
No, it just means Shutterstock or the end user or perhaps even the photographer could be sued by the copyright holder. It's a worst case scenario, but Shutterstock doesn't want to take any risks.
|
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39156
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 1:06 pm
| |
Nor to you. your the one there gonna come after. Read the TOS.
|
|
| |
|
Log in
