MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Potential trademark or copyright infringement?  (Read 5399 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 08, 2008, 16:15 »
0
I tried to upload pictures of animals in San Diego Zoo. All were rejected.







« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2008, 16:17 »
0
seems to me this exact topic came up before.... animals and San Diego zoo...  did you do a search on this here.?  Maybe someone just made a reference to it.......   if it was here, someone will soon let you know.  8)=tom

« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2008, 16:20 »
0
I don't remember a thread on this (there probably is one though) but if you look on the back of your zoo ticket it probably says something like : pictures are not allowed to be taken of the animals for commercial purposes.

« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2008, 16:31 »
0
Well I do not remember since this pictures are from 2002 but I do not see "San Diego Zoo" on these animals, reviewers must get it from my keywords :-)

« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2008, 16:36 »
0
or the very zoo like setting the animals are in?  most every zoo has rules for not taking pictures of the animals for profit - it is not isolated to the san diego zoo.

« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2008, 16:46 »
0
They weren't threads dedicated to the SD zoo, they were comments about the issue.  I don't know how to link the threads here, sorry.  But if you just type San Diego Zoo into the search bar,  they'll come up along with yours here.     8)=tom

« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2008, 16:47 »
0
You must be right. I checked my portfolio and only one photo with animals has been approved:


« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2008, 17:28 »
0
I found this on IS:

Zoological Locations such as Seaword, San Diego Zoo, Busch Gardens, etc - Logos, images from theme parks, shows, attractions, products, animals, productions, characters or wordmarks are all protected and cannot be photographed for commercial use.

For clarity this policy applies to ALL zoological locations.

But I think they're being overly restrictive.  You can find images of San Diego Zoo animals on Getty.

« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2008, 22:45 »
0
I found this on IS:

Zoological Locations such as Seaword, San Diego Zoo, Busch Gardens, etc - Logos, images from theme parks, shows, attractions, products, animals, productions, characters or wordmarks are all protected and cannot be photographed for commercial use.

For clarity this policy applies to ALL zoological locations.

But I think they're being overly restrictive.  You can find images of San Diego Zoo animals on Getty.

The difference is that on Getty they may be RM and not RF. They could be used for editorial. For instance, if they had a sudden death of the flamingo population at the zoo, that photo could definitely be used in a news item. Otherwise, to restrict the use of the photo would be in violation of first amendment rights in the USA.

But the poster is right about commercial purposes. Even the local zoo here instituted such a policy, and it is a small zoo.

RacePhoto

« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2008, 00:34 »
0

But the poster is right about commercial purposes. Even the local zoo here instituted such a policy, and it is a small zoo.

I was going to take a photo of some scrambled eggs or maybe an omelet, but then I realized I'd probably need the signature of the Mother hen, the people who made the plate plus the designer and company that made the silverware.

This is getting ridiculous.

« Reply #10 on: May 09, 2008, 03:55 »
0
Quote
I was going to take a photo of some scrambled eggs or maybe an omelet, but then I realized I'd probably need the signature of the Mother hen, the people who made the plate plus the designer and company that made the silverware.

This is getting ridiculous.

If it's on a table, don't forget the release from the table manufacturer. If a wall can be seen in the background, you'll probably need releases from the homebuilder and the architect and whatever paint company's product that was used in painting, the drywall manufacturer, etc. And let's not forget the releases from all those microscopic dust mites that are floating in the air in front of the camera as well.

« Reply #11 on: May 09, 2008, 20:51 »
0
On the silverware, yes I have to watch what I use. I usually try and buy generic styles from a restaurant supplier, along with the plates. No Onieda flatware, no Lenox china.

And yes, wallpapers can be an issue as well, with the new "designer lines" that have come along. Likewise, designer clothing for models that come in distinctive prints even from discount stores (like Kmart and Target), because some of them are "designer lines" and have famous names attached.

So even though I understand the intended spirit of the above posts, it unfortunately is becoming a big issue issue with stock shooters.

RacePhoto

« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2008, 00:14 »
0

So even though I understand the intended spirit of the above posts, it unfortunately is becoming a big issue issue with stock shooters.

Please don't feed more fear to the lawyer snakes at the agencies.  >:(

We already have Property Releases that are required by most of the agencies, and they aren't legally needed and don't legally exist. We're setting a precedent and creating a legal issue, where there was none.

I don't have the million dollars to fight a PUBLIC zoo over rights to use photos, but folks, it's your tax dollars that pay for these places. That's why USGS maps and photos are public domain. That's why the NASA photos are public domain.

At the rate we are going, there will be no stock photos, because breeds of animals and varieties of plants will be protected.

This is getting ridiculous.

DanP68

« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2008, 00:40 »
0
Don't fret RacePhoto.  If you clear all of these hurdles, you can sell one of your images for 25 or 30 cents.         
 ::)
« Last Edit: May 10, 2008, 01:10 by DanP68 »

« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2008, 01:32 »
0
Don't fret RacePhoto.  If you clear all of these hurdles, you can sell one of your images for 25 or 30 cents.         
 ::)

LOL... amen, DanP...  LOL.   Sad truth that it is.  Crap, didn't someone just recently complain (here on MSG)  that one of the agencies wanted model release on the back of someone's head?  8)=tom

Think I'll run out and get a copywrite on my bald spot.  :D

« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2008, 02:24 »
0
The San Diego Zoo / San Diego Zoological society is a private corporation.

I'm pretty municipally owned zoos are OK.

DanP68

« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2008, 02:41 »
0
Don't fret RacePhoto.  If you clear all of these hurdles, you can sell one of your images for 25 or 30 cents.         
 ::)

LOL... amen, DanP...  LOL.   Sad truth that it is.  Crap, didn't someone just recently complain (here on MSG)  that one of the agencies wanted model release on the back of someone's head?  8)=tom

Think I'll run out and get a copywrite on my bald spot.  :D


It's worse than that.  There are people here who have complained that they submitted a model release for someone viewed from behind, and had the image rejected because the reviewer said no release was needed. 

Seriously, how can you hope to adhere to rules when the reviewers themselves cannot agree on what they are? 

As far as the back of someone's head goes, I guess it depends on the image.  If it is a large crowd in a public place, and nobody is identifiable, I would hope no release would be needed.  However we have seen many unfortunate "sniper shots" without releases of people hanging out at the beach or wherever.  I have a major problem with that.  If that were me, or my wife or kids, I would feel completely violated.

When there is any shred of doubt, I feel a release should be provided.  Any reviewer which turns down an image because he/she didn't feel the release was needed, should lose their job on the spot.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
23 Replies
8500 Views
Last post May 27, 2009, 03:25
by MichaelJay
9 Replies
9171 Views
Last post September 08, 2009, 02:49
by cardmaverick
7 Replies
2735 Views
Last post June 07, 2010, 18:32
by Phil
27 Replies
7421 Views
Last post August 28, 2014, 12:23
by PixelBytes
5 Replies
1407 Views
Last post July 01, 2013, 07:52
by ruxpriencdiam

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors