Jump to content

Anyone else suffering from logoism?


Recommended Posts

I've just been told that two shots have been deleted from my collection  "to avoid further legal action."

 

They show the logo of a high street bank - one as a part of a building and another as an old style free standing sign. A quick check finds 700+ images described as brand X logo on sale within Alamy. 

 

Has anyone else had photos deleted as a result of this purge, or are there dark forces out to get me?  :rolleyes: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Had the licensing terms altered for an image in which the Olympic 'rings' were only just visible - and instructed to be a good boy in the future!

Me, too.

 

 

Same !! Now marked as "Editorial only", which it was anyway as an RM image with no releases !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought a logo on it's own was forbidden and a logo in context would be allowed.

 

 

F4R05P.jpg

 

I am keywording this logo as we speak. So earlier I checked on other occurrences, and I found these:

goodyear-tire-and-rubber-company-logo-ed

and

company-logo-of-the-american-tyre-manufa

 

Both contributors have around 1300 straight logos, so it's either allowed or not policed.

 

# 63,391,372?

There are 214,865 images that come up for a search on logo. Not all are straight logos.

(39 are mine).

 

wim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I thought that the purpose of a logo was to get your brand out there in the public eye.

 

I haven't come down with logoism yet, but I am a possible candidate. Is there a vaccine available?

 

Of course there is. Has been for 10 years in fact.

;-)

 

wim

 

edit: oops -15 years in fact: the edition is from 2009.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had one removed yesterday.  Image of a very old and obviously unused Barclays Night Safe in a wall - not just a photo of the logo..  

 

Photo taken from the public pavement and on as RM - no property release.

 

There are thousands of images on Alamy with the Barclays Logo on so I'm a bit confused why mine has been targeted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Had the licensing terms altered for an image in which the Olympic 'rings' were only just visible - and instructed to be a good boy in the future!

Me, too.

 

 

Same !! Now marked as "Editorial only", which it was anyway as an RM image with no releases !

 

 

Likewise for one of my images taken in Whistler.  But I've never had one taken down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hmmm... I thought that the purpose of a logo was to get your brand out there in the public eye.

 

I haven't come down with logoism yet, but I am a possible candidate. Is there a vaccine available?

 

Of course there is. Has been for 10 years in fact.

;-)

 

wim

 

edit: oops -15 years in fact: the edition is from 2009.

 

 

The battle of the logos.

 

I try to avoid logos as much as possible when buying clothing, etc. Not always easy to do, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it's only Barclays logo that has been taken down just now. I have had two removed but they didn't just show the logo alone. They still show in a search but the site hasn't been updated yet.

 

Pearl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had one removed yesterday.  Image of a very old and obviously unused Barclays Night Safe in a wall - not just a photo of the logo..  

 

Photo taken from the public pavement and on as RM - no property release.

 

There are thousands of images on Alamy with the Barclays Logo on so I'm a bit confused why mine has been targeted.

 

You're not alone, many (myself included) having the same issue. Logic is that Alamy will eventually end up logo free as more and more lawyers send in letters of complaint.

 

I'll happily send the pulled work to microstock as RF editorial only....Alamy only have themselves to blame.

 

What is annoying is that they quote the 'cannot be a logo alone' from submission guidelines which most images won't be......... they can pull the image but please have the courtesy to at least explain it as kowtowing to letters of complaint rather than breaking the submission guidelines which puts the onus on the contributor and was b#llocks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes...Barclays.

 

Had this from Image Management as mine is a shot of a museum piece! C4HH2E, and I suggested they reconsider their decision.

 

"Hi Phil

 

We realise it’s a contentious issue and isn’t always straight forward. We’ve sought legal advice in the past which is why our Terms and Conditions say we don’t accept logos. 

 

The real issue seems to be how much context there needs to be in an image. Barclay’s lawyers have a clear view and we’re taking legal advice to see if we share that view. 

 

In the meantime, while we review our policy and take further legal advice we’ll be leaving these off the site and we’ll be in touch to hopefully say we can put these back on sale.

 

We’d like as many of your images on sale as we can. We don’t like deleting images but we have to act with caution.  

 

 

Thanks

 

Asha

Image Management"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.