MicrostockGroup

Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Wisent on July 31, 2006, 06:39

Title: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: Wisent on July 31, 2006, 06:39

I went on a holiday to Valencia and found some great graffiti work there in the narrow smelly streets that run through the city. My question is, can i sell these as stock or not? I think that since they are illegal works they can't really belong to anyone so i don't need a property release. Or do i have to remove the artists mark or something, i really don't know.

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: CJPhoto on July 31, 2006, 09:04

They are artwork, so even though illegal, you still need a model release.

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: leaf on July 31, 2006, 10:27

that is of course if they are identifiable.  if they are scribbly letters, i don't think there would be a problem.  Actual nice images, or words.. yeah, i guess a property release.

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: fintastique on July 31, 2006, 16:39

I'm sure I had a rejection from iStock of a semi derelict house in Glasgow that had been tagged to death as they considered the tags to be identifiable marls (like signatures).

Might be easy to draw your own graffiti and sign the form yourself  ;D

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: Wisent on August 01, 2006, 14:00

Too bad, i gues i still got some nice desktop images out of them for my personal viewing pleasure.

Thanks for the replies

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: Wisent on August 09, 2006, 18:41

i mailed lucky oliver about this and they said "we do take graffiti shots as long as they don't
contain any copyrighted logos or the artists name".

I've also noticed that dreamstime accepts graffiti pics.

Does this mean that it is legal and i won't get sewed(don't know the correct spelling), or just that they take the risk because the chance of getting sewed is minimal?

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: Quevaal on August 09, 2006, 20:04

What's legal and not depends on the country.
But I think the chance of getting sued because of grafitti is minimal - unless - it's paid for, something which is sometimes the case.

I have a few graffiti shots myself, but they're not identifiable:
http://www.heyheydecay.net/thumbs/concretetextures.htm

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: Wisent on August 10, 2006, 13:15

Mine are more of an overal shot of the entire "design". I'll submit them and trust that when an agency accepts i'm alright legally wise.
Thanks for the reply

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: kacper on August 10, 2006, 13:21

Quote from: CJPhoto on July 31, 2006, 09:04

They are artwork, so even though illegal, you still need a model release.

It's a strange world we live in when the rights of criminals are above the rights of the rest of the folk.

Fotolia takes grafitti, iStock doesn't (stupid Canadian Walmart of microstocks), Dreamstime and Shutterstock sometimes.

Title: Re: graffiti pics, legal or not?
Post by: Quevaal on August 13, 2006, 13:07

Quote from: kacper on August 10, 2006, 13:21

Quote from: CJPhoto on July 31, 2006, 09:04

They are artwork, so even though illegal, you still need a model release.

It's a strange world we live in when the rights of criminals are above the rights of the rest of the folk.

Fotolia takes grafitti, iStock doesn't (stupid Canadian Walmart of microstocks), Dreamstime and Shutterstock sometimes.

I agree about the stuff with criminals, but I also think that the bigger you are, the bigger the chance of getting sued. Neither sxc.hu takes graffiti btw. In my opinion, they should have different attitude to clearly illegal graffiti and legal pieces.