pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Hilarious DT rejection!  (Read 3607 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 17, 2008, 17:26 »
0
SO I did these silhouette shots - one adult, one kid.  I uploaded MRs with them to show that a) these are my images and b) I have the right to use these people's photos.

REJECTED!

Reason:  No identifiable person in the image, no MR needed.  Please correct the problem and resubmit.

 :D :D :D :D

Rejected for HAVING a MR?


jsnover

« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2008, 17:38 »
0
I've had both - rejection for a shot of a nose in profile (needs a model release) and one for (I think, it was a while ago) the back of someone (doesn't need one and I submitted it).

I can't explain black holes either :)

« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2008, 17:46 »
0
Now you see that kind of rejection plays BOTH ways:

Last year or so I uploaded this image and it was rejected.



The reason: (I para phrase) "Please send a copy of you source for this image. Please upload it
and submit it as a model release.

So I had to send them a copy of the photo I used the pen tool to isolate the person on.
Times change, people change, policies changes. The only thing we can guarantee in this life is CHANGE.

The MIZ

« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2008, 03:23 »
0
I've had both, too.  :-)   No need for a model release on a shot of my daughter holding her white cane at her side.  I thought it would be a good idea to include it, because some people get overly sensitive when it comes to the potential to exploit disabled people.   

And then like Miz, I needed a model release on a vector silhouette...and the source photo was of a statue!  Oy vey. 

I swear...rejections are getting crazier every day.

RT


« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2008, 04:51 »
0
Dreamstime are the worst site for ridiculous rejections, like the above I've had shots rejected for not having a model release when one isn't required, and then the opposite when I've included a release, it would appear that they don't give any instructions to their editors on the subject.
Like it has been said what difference does it make if you upload a release when one isn't required.

However they still go down in my book as giving the MOST ridiculous rejection I've ever ever had, I uploaded a shot of a bottle of Champagne, it had blank labels apart from the word Champagne which I had made myself and I even left a note for the editor to that effect, it got rejected for 'copyright' so I contacted support about it, the reply I got from Dreamstime support was:
 " The problem is the word Champagne is trademarked, please contact the trademark owner for a property release"
After falling off my chair laughing I replied "where . do you get your information from, of course the word Champagne isn't trademarked, it's a region of France, a type of grape and the name given to the method used for fermenting a wine, it is not and cannot be trademarked, you're getting confused with the time when the French government tried to enforce a law that meant you could only call it Champagne if it came from France, they lost which is why there are about 10 million different types of Champagne for sale across the world"
Naturally I didn't get a reply!! and of course no other site rejected the image, but if you check their thread in the forum on the subject of copyright it's full of wrong information.

« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2008, 05:00 »
0
Hi,

Since a year or so, maybe two only champagne produced according to stipulated rules in the champagne region with the champagne grape, can hold the name champagne. Every other botlle of champagne produced outside the champagne region is in violation when it holds the name champagne.

Actually, the name champagne has been trademarked by the french goverment.

Patrick.

RT


« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2008, 07:15 »
0
Actually, the name champagne has been trademarked by the french goverment.
Patrick.

No - the process of making sparkling wine and then bottling in a way to make people belive it is French champagne coming from the Champagne region in France has been trademarked by the French, the WORD Champagne has not and cannot be trademarked.

There is a huge difference in a trademark and a copyright, a trademark is to ensure that nobody carries on the same line of business or produces an identical product as the person/company that has registered a trademark in a particular region.

And hence I could go out tomorrow and start a company called McDonalds or Apple as long as I wasn't producing burgers or making computers, this is despite both those corporation holdings trademarks.

I could also start making and selling sparkling wine and call it Champagne as long as I didn't mislead anybody into thinking it was French Champagne from the region of Champagne in France, which is why Champagne is produced in America,Russia,Australia and probably fifty other countries.

If you don't believe any of this go down to your local wine merchant and have a look at some Champagne bottles and see how many are from places other than France, or try searching on Google for companies called McDonalds or Apple that are things like plumbers, hairdressers, shops or anything else.

Trademarks are designed to stop someone carrying on the same 'Trade' using the same 'Mark' and are nothing to do with copyright, and as in my example above it is why no other stock site apart from Dreamstime has a problem accepting an image with a generic term.

Now I'm off to trademark the words Stock, Photo, Photography, Image, Illustration, Camera, Digital and Isolation  :D




DanP68

« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2008, 07:17 »
0
Mantonino,

Challenge it.  That is a very poor reason for a rejection.  

You would think logic would play a role.  If an image doesn't need a MR in the reviewer's eyes, then he/she should just detach the model release from the image.  Why reject the image outright?  

Consistency is really important to all of us.  We've been told prior to upload MR's when in doubt, particularly where minors are involved.  All you are doing is following the suggestions we have been given.

I wouldn't say DT is the leader of weird rejections.  I get far more head scratchers from IS and FT.  SS and DT seem to be the most predictable and reasoned with my images.

Serban pops onto these boards from time to time.  Hopefully he'll chime in.

« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2008, 07:18 »
0
"Since a year or so, maybe two only champagne produced according to stipulated rules in the champagne region with the champagne grape, can hold the name champagne. Every other botlle of champagne produced outside the champagne region is in violation when it holds the name champagne.

Actually, the name champagne has been trademarked by the french goverment."


I've got a great WWII French rifle...only dropped once :D

RT


« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2008, 06:09 »
0
Now you see that kind of rejection plays BOTH ways:

Last year or so I uploaded this image and it was rejected.



The reason: (I para phrase) "Please send a copy of you source for this image. Please upload it
and submit it as a model release.

So I had to send them a copy of the photo I used the pen tool to isolate the person on.
Times change, people change, policies changes. The only thing we can guarantee in this life is CHANGE.

The MIZ


Irrelevant of the need for a model release but this example the MIZ has given is another fine example of how Dreamstime don't have a clue about trademarks/copyright, if Apple were to take a look at this series of photos and the descriptions/keywords they would have a field day for trademark and copyright infringement.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
3476 Views
Last post September 18, 2007, 15:26
by chellyar
5 Replies
2238 Views
Last post March 04, 2010, 13:25
by lisafx
20 Replies
3674 Views
Last post February 17, 2012, 20:00
by Microstock Posts
19 Replies
3325 Views
Last post June 06, 2016, 02:18
by Justanotherphotographer
8 Replies
1472 Views
Last post December 20, 2018, 15:13
by cathyslife

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results