BoBman Posted June 19, 2017 Share Posted June 19, 2017 Buildings, cars etc are property, something owned by someone. Q1. One could argue a field is thus property, but shots of just landscape etc without buildings and people do not need a property release form for commercial use, am I right ? Q2. What if there is e.g a dog or horse in the landscape, does that get declared as Property yes and require finding the owner to get a Property Release form signed ? Q3. Is property equipment owned by somebody and being worn by them, such as scuba gear or flying equipment ? If someone is wearing such, is the answer people 1, property yes. ? BoBman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve F Posted June 20, 2017 Share Posted June 20, 2017 Hi Bobman, Yes, it can be difficult! I would take property as being any building and anything - equipment, clothing etc. - that has a brand name displayed or is recognisable as belonging to a brand. Things owned by people such as pets and fields I wouldn't normally count as property. However, there are exceptions, I believe that the National Trust for example, doesn't allow commercial photography on its grounds, including fields. I don't believe Alamy expects us to be experts at this, just use your best judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stockfotoart Posted June 20, 2017 Share Posted June 20, 2017 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted June 20, 2017 Share Posted June 20, 2017 What constitutes property is a perennial question that continues to confound me, so much so that if an image has anything man-made in it that someone might recognize (e.g. a front door of a house), I say that that it contains property. Is a person's clothing property? Now there's a tough one. If you shoot in a nudist colony, is skin property? I don't know. The few times that I photograph pets -- Aren't they supposed to be "animal companions" now? -- I also indicate property. Glad I'm not a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_Jacobs Posted June 20, 2017 Share Posted June 20, 2017 If one can sue you, it's property... A numberplate can be property... A screenshot also... in doubt, check editorial... buyers are also aware of this issue... Let them chose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted June 20, 2017 Share Posted June 20, 2017 Pets are property. Also animals in zoos (and most zoos can recognize their animals). Zoos differ a lot on how strict they are about photography. I remember years and years ago I was calling Sea World and the San Diego Zoo about their policies. At that time the San Diego Zoo said just go ahead. That has changed drastically now. They are very, very strict. When I called Sea World I happened to reach a photographer on their staff. He advised me that I'd probably be OK for a local photo contest but definitely not for commercial sale. He said they would recognize their animals for sure. Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariaJ Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 And if it's your own pet, upload a property release for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDoug Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 I assume that patented cultivars are the property of the one who bred them. http://extension.oregonstate.edu/gardening/what-does-it-mean-when-nursery-plants-are-patented-or-trademarked I virtually always click "yes" to the question of property, because, who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callie Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 Am I being over cautious? I virtually always tick property as yes, even for landscapes and cityscapes. Yet I know that if one of my agents uploaded a similar photo to Alamy they would tick no for the exact same buildings in my cityscape and set as royalty free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.