Editorial Only for Street Art?

[Number Six]

I noticed the following comment by Alamy's sister company (the S-word) on Twitter yesterday at the end of a post extolling the virtues of street art photography;  "Remember to tag your photos as editorial to avoid any copyright issues".

 

This was seen as a big issue by Alamy a while back, and I was one of many members who had some photographs deleted. There was also guidance on what street art photos could be included (eg. as part of an overall scene) but I don't recall a recommendation to use the 'Editorial Only' button as some sort of magic wand for acceptability.

 

Has anyone seen such advice from Alamy, or perhaps Alamy would care to comment?

 

Many thanks,

John.

[Joseph Clemson]

Personally, I regard anything posted on Twitter as being untrustworthy and lacking credibility, posted probably by some numpty who may  know lots about social media but may not have a full range of expertise in the subject they are dealing with. The tweet you refer to is typical in that it has an element of truth but doesn't tell the whole story.

 

The last word from Alamy I am aware of is their own blog on street art, which states that the street art must be in a wider context AND be ticked Editorial Only.

 

ETA Looking at the tweet itself, I would say that the images showing on the tweet would not pass the 'wider context' requirement. Perhaps Alamy would care to comment on this, given the fuss they have made previously on the subject.

[Number Six]

Joseph -  many thanks for the link to Alamy's advice on street art. Like you, I think that the term 'wider context' is open to interpretation but I suspect that it probably always will be. However, the requirement for selecting Editorial Only is obviously clear.