pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stupid file deactivation by istock  (Read 3913 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 16, 2015, 02:12 »
0
I've had some files deactivated for hilarious reasons, but this one tops them all (showing the file from FT, because on IS of course no longer visible):

Original description: Englischer Garten, Munich's largest park with the Monopteros temple on a hill

Deactivation reason "The content is not suitable for our broad Royalty Free license; the reason given was: This content is not suitable for the Royalty Free Licensing model. Please see: http://wiki.gettyimages.com/castles-in-europe/"

Besides that we have Freedom of Panorama in Germany I can't spot the castle in the image. Can you?


« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2015, 02:25 »
0
Same here, 3 files from the English Garden in Munich deactivated . . . .  . who the F knows why.

« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2015, 03:26 »
+2
Not to support IS here, but the "Panoramafreiheit" applies to public ground (as in streets, boardwalks,...). The "Englische Garten" is most certainly not public ground, but is rather governed by the "Bayerische Schlsserverwaltung" - this is where the castle comes from...

« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2015, 03:40 »
+2
Not to support IS here, but the "Panoramafreiheit" applies to public ground (as in streets, boardwalks,...). The "Englische Garten" is most certainly not public ground, but is rather governed by the "Bayerische Schlsserverwaltung" - this is where the castle comes from...

"Public ground" in that sense is not defined by who it belongs to, it is defined by whether it is publicly accessible without going through some sort of access limitation (i.e. a gate that gets closed now and then). For example, train stations are considered public ground as they are dedicated to the public and open around the clock and for everybody, even though they belong to the private train company and are even inside. The Schlosspark Glienicke in Potsdam on the other hand has gates that, while they are not always staffed and never used to charge admission, close at night. That has been considered sufficient to exclude freedom of panorama in court. I do not know about the Englischer Garten. Does it ever close? Does it exclude some people?

Either way, if iStock is now deactivating files from this location, chances are that they received a cease and desist letter. If that letter is legally in the right, who can say.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 03:44 by MarcvsTvllivs »

Semmick Photo

« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2015, 03:42 »
-1
Could it not be an honest mistake?

« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2015, 04:26 »
0
From Wiki

The Englischer Garten, German for "English Garden", is a large public park in the centre of Munich, Bavaria.

So, where's the beef?

Me


« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2015, 04:56 »
+5
If it's on Wiki then it must be true

« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2015, 08:04 »
0
...For example, train stations are considered public ground as they are dedicated to the public and open around the clock and for everybody, even though they belong to the private train company and are even inside...


I'm pretty sure that train stations are not public ground (with respect to the Panoramafreiheit) and that the "Hausrecht" of the "Deutsche Bahn" applies... I'm also pretty you are not allowed to take photos within a German railway station for commercial purposes without having the permission of the DB: Click

Edit: In the end, this discussion is moot anyway. If they have decided they need a release or that it can only be submitted as editorial, they are not going to change their mind...
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 08:12 by Ploink »

« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2015, 08:56 »
0
The whole "public park" thing can be a bit misleading. What people perceive to be a public place is often, in fact, not. For example, most of the major parks in London (e.g. Regents Park) come under the control of the Royal Parks organisation and no commercial photography (or filming) is allowed without a) prior permission and b) paying a substantial fee for a permit.
Dog walkers get clobbered too - there's a 300 p/a fee if you want to walk dogs in the parks (if you are doing it for money).

Out of interest Ron, did they say if you could re-submit the images as Editorial? The only deactivation I ever had offered that as an option. Regards, David.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2015, 09:01 »
0
I am not on IS  ;)

« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2015, 09:01 »
0
Mine didn't mention Editorial, it only said:

"The content is not suitable for our broad Royalty Free license; the reason given was: This content is not suitable for the Royalty Free Licensing model."

« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2015, 09:24 »
0
I am not on IS  ;)

Ooops, sorry Ron - muddled you up with the OP! Regards, David.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2015, 11:57 »
+3
A couple of small points. Some of these locations, gardens, castles, (whatever this place actually is) could have complained when they saw images of their property being sold RF. So IS went back and removed anything from the location of the complaining site.

"What's Actually Legal" vs What an agency says they will allow or not, on their own site are not always the same.

We can point out right to panorama, legal locations, where we are standing, public view. But if some site says, we can't upload something and they won't license it... we can't.

« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2015, 12:00 »
0
http://wiki.gettyimages.com/munich-olympic-park/

The olympic park is also off limits according the wiki.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
13 Replies
4344 Views
Last post November 20, 2010, 09:14
by ShadySue
17 Replies
4448 Views
Last post January 15, 2013, 08:21
by jtyler
938 Replies
109243 Views
Last post April 30, 2014, 18:36
by deryl1975
35 Replies
4883 Views
Last post November 22, 2013, 14:24
by BaldricksTrousers
3 Replies
912 Views
Last post January 27, 2017, 09:54
by russianbeardedman

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors