Sign in to follow this  
moderator2

Shutterstock Property Release Policy

Recommended Posts

Contributors,

 

As many of you know, Shutterstock has been accepting, though not requiring, property releases for the past few years. Rather than continue our policy of rejecting images when we feel that a property release is required, we are making our form of property release available for download, first in this forum and then generally on the site. There is no need to provide property releases with your editorial image & footage submissions. For more information on our editorial policy, please see the forum post regarding editorial submissions.

 

The laws regarding the necessity of property releases are in flux and do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If the subject of your image contains any of the following, please provide a properly completed and signed property release when your content is submitted.

 

* Modern Architecture

* Building interiors

* Unique and/or custom designed luxury boats, vehicles, airplanes, etc.

* Recognizable animals: race horses, unique pets, certain zoo animals, etc.

* Photos/video of building exteriors taken from private property

* Photographs of artwork

* Public places with photography policies: most stadiums, museums, amusement parks, etc.

* Famous landmarks & historic locations:

Will vary from site to site - please familiarize yourself with location's photography policy

(See our posting of current image restrictions for more information.)

 

The foregoing list is not all inclusive and should be used for general guidance only. As a photographer, it is your responsibility to do the research and determine if a release is necessary. Each specific instance must be considered individually. As a reminder, you are bound by the Terms of Service when you signed up as a contributor for Shutterstock. Please refer to the TOS for additional information.

post-170438-14368330232372_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SS should look at how things are regulated in different countries. Such as the Netherlands, where the portrait law is already regulated. This also applies to buildings, etc. Maybe there is a possibility that it by country can be specified and laws regarding this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SS should look at how things are regulated in different countries. Such as the Netherlands, where the portrait law is already regulated. This also applies to buildings, etc. Maybe there is a possibility that it by country can be specified and laws regarding this country.

 

i bet its too complicated..

for example, i took my daughter on a cruise on Princess. Here in canada, she can drink at 18.

but in some countries,like parts of the usa, you have to be 21...

so princess decided to take the highest age as their minimum drinking age.. minimizes the possibility of any liability. and they dont have to ask for citizenship every time you mosey up to the bar.

believe me.. they would if they could. alot of people spend more on booze on a cruise than their damn cruise ticket..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about apartment interiors. I had a whole batch rejected. I understand a building interior but an apartment interior?

is it the furniture that needs the release? What if I'm photographing an empty apartment interior, would that need a release?

please clarify

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what about apartment interiors. I had a whole batch rejected. I understand a building interior but an apartment interior?

is it the furniture that needs the release? What if I'm photographing an empty apartment interior, would that need a release?

please clarify

thanks

 

Hello, I just submited somo pics from the interior of an empty apartment, all rejected with subject: property release.. So now I will print the property release and take it to the owner to sign it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the owner?? what if the builder becomes an issue, or the developer, or the interior decorator????

from whom do we need to get a release from??

what if the property owner is not the owner of record according to the county recorder/appraisers website?

I'm not clear on any of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the owner?? what if the builder becomes an issue, or the developer, or the interior decorator????

from whom do we need to get a release from??

what if the property owner is not the owner of record according to the county recorder/appraisers website?

I'm not clear on any of this.

Yes this is where it gets complicated who has to sign the release?The manager on duty the assistant the builder the designer the owner to many who's in the pot and then what if it is not the right who that signs it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just had these images approved by two other sites.
bear in mind that different agency has different set of criterion. what might be approved here might not get approved somewhere else and vice versa. it's all a different set of rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind submitting release for artwork, but this function does not work. Inspectors don't see attached releases. I still get same rejection reason "Please provide a property release for this image"

and why vectors don't require release? images that are done in vector are not considered to be an artwork?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is madness, they required property release almost for everything! I've uploaded my watercolor paintings - 1)lemons (lemons are always the same: yellow and spherical, no extra-features) - asked for prop. release! 2) caricature of two people (no real people just funny faces that came from my imagination) - the same thing!

Who must sign this property release? Maybe those two people from my imagination?

post-191624-14368332616924_thumb.jpg

post-191624-14368332617369_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
imagination) - the same thing!

Who must sign this property release? Maybe those two people from my imagination?

 

there is no such thing as imagination. your brain constructed those facial images based upon its database of thousands you have seen since birth. so somewhere, there is a person who looks just like that.

you have to just find them now...

 

good luck.

 

you can start with camilla and prince charles first.. i'd say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is madness, they required property release almost for everything! I've uploaded my watercolor paintings - 1)lemons (lemons are always the same: yellow and spherical, no extra-features) - asked for prop. release! 2) caricature of two people (no real people just funny faces that came from my imagination) - the same thing!

Who must sign this property release? Maybe those two people from my imagination?

 

What they want is a release from the illustrator who made the drawings. In the case that you are the illustrator, you must sign a release yourself stating they are your own illustrations.

 

It be the same if you took a self-portrait photo. You would need to sign your own model release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I´ve just submitted cinema interior images WITH enclosed property release. Images were accepted, but release info is missing.

stock-photo-interior-of-cinema-auditorium-with-lines-of-chairs-55628830.jpg

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=55628830

 

Previously accepted images from different cinema submitted as well with PR are showing, that property release is signed.

stock-photo-empty-retro-cinema-auditorium-in-cubism-style-with-line-of-chairs-and-projection-screen-ready-for-53561218.jpg

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=53561218

Anybody have the similar experience?

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 bichon:

thanks for your advice, but what if the next time i'll draw a three-head and eight-legs monster, could you tell me where to find it?

 

2 evaners:

thanks for the explanation.

 

But now those images are rejected and as i see there is no way to resubmit them with those property releases. Even on "Edit Photo" page. So i have to submit these images again in new. I'm already bored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 bichon:

I had no sleep last night!

 

And again about this property release. Where should i find that Witness for the signing? Is it Jehovah's Witness? Or should i fetch my watercolor papers to the notary office? All this so complicated!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And again about this property release. Where should i find that Witness for the signing? Is it Jehovah's Witness? Or should i fetch my watercolor papers to the notary office? All this so complicated!

 

As witness I´m using anybody available around. Witness confirm, that signatures are representing people on PR/MR. Still keep on mind: PR/MR is your protection.

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

new rules complicate our work. I did upload few detail shots of interiors - as armchair with a coffee table, detail of kitchen etc. Nothing extra special nor designer pieces. I was asked to provide a property release and that's ridiculous. I assume they will lose a lot of business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
new rules complicate our work. I did upload few detail shots of interiors - as armchair with a coffee table, detail of kitchen etc. Nothing extra special nor designer pieces. I was asked to provide a property release and that's ridiculous. I assume they will lose a lot of business.
just move them somewhere else who still accept them without releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If the subject of your image contains any of the following, please provide a properly completed and signed property release when your content is submitted."

 

"As a photographer, it is your responsibility to do the research and determine if a release is necessary."

 

First, the two statements above are contradictory. If I do the research and determine a release is NOT necessary your reviewer may say that yes, a release IS necessary. So what has been accomplished?

 

Your list of subjects includes almost every material object in the civilized world. Do you think that movie producers shooting on location in a city get releases from every store, sign, passing automobile, pedestrian and unique appearing dog in the background?

 

Editorial? Are you kidding. Most of the giants of photojournalism who pursued great social themes would not get accepted by your reviewers because they were not what you deem NEWSWORTHY. Newsworthy is apparently sports and train wrecks. That's all.

 

Really, SS needs to give some serious thought to its policies regarding editorial and documentary photography (and the other microstocks, too, not to single you out). A lot of editorial usage is used to illustrate themes that are not exactly newsworthy. The microstocks are narrowing the concept, possibly out of fear of law suites, but there is a great body of law supporting a more liberal interpretation.

 

You don't want to end up with 13 million images of sports, train wrecks and business people on white isolated backgrounds.

 

Or do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"If the subject of your image contains any of the following, please provide a properly completed and signed property release when your content is submitted."

 

"As a photographer, it is your responsibility to do the research and determine if a release is necessary."

 

First, the two statements above are contradictory. If I do the research and determine a release is NOT necessary your reviewer may say that yes, a release IS necessary. So what has been accomplished?

 

Your list of subjects includes almost every material object in the civilized world. Do you think that movie producers shooting on location in a city get releases from every store, sign, passing automobile, pedestrian and unique appearing dog in the background?

 

Editorial? Are you kidding. Most of the giants of photojournalism who pursued great social themes would not get accepted by your reviewers because they were not what you deem NEWSWORTHY. Newsworthy is apparently sports and train wrecks. That's all.

 

Really, SS needs to give some serious thought to its policies regarding editorial and documentary photography (and the other microstocks, too, not to single you out). A lot of editorial usage is used to illustrate themes that are not exactly newsworthy. The microstocks are narrowing the concept, possibly out of fear of law suites, but there is a great body of law supporting a more liberal interpretation.

 

You don't want to end up with 13 million images of sports, train wrecks and business people on white isolated backgrounds.

 

Or do you?

 

Shutterstock has put a good deal of thought into their policies on releases that is exactly why they made the changes that they did and why so many people are bitching.

 

Copyright/Trademark laws and protections are extremely varied and complicated. Their are law suits brought about all over the world constantly because someone did not want their property used in a manner that made money for someone else without their permission.

 

To reduce the liability potential Shutterstock and other stock sites have changed their policies and those submitting images either follow them or move on.

 

Your comment about film producers getting releases they actually do or names of places are changed. Most vehicles in movies are those owned or rented by the production company. People in the scenes are actors or extras signed by the production company to appear in the film. Film companies also do have negotiated agreements with the owners of well known structures to use their buildings in a film.

 

As far as editorial or photojournalism images they have also made changes in those areas. They have one requirement and that it be newsworthy. Granted what is newsworthy is open to debate but Shutterstock is not a place for displaying the photo-journalistic abilities of others. It is a stock site that is in the business to sell stock images, that's it.

 

As far as having 13 million images of only what you described well they are accepting about 70,000 new images a day of widely varying subject matter.

 

Submitters may not like the rules but that's the way things are. If someone doesn't like them then they have other options and ways of selling their images and they are free to take good use of them.

 

Have things gotten more difficult for submitters to get images accepted? Of course but the days of going out and snapping a shot of a car or another shot looking up at an office building are over. The times are changing so we either have to change with them or we take our toys and go play somewhere else. In the end Shutterstock is going to do what they feel is best to protect themselves from potential liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hhltdave5, thanks for your well reasoned reply. I can understand and agree with much of it. All those images out there must give legal nightmares to SS staff.

 

It's always been Shutterstock's ballgame and most of us will continue to play by the rules as we are given to understand them.

 

I'm grateful for Shutterstock's role in providing a little extra retirement income. That doesn't mean I can't be a little critical, especially since digital imaging, along with digital everything else, is evolving daily and occupying new territory.

 

Thanks again for your response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhltdave5, thanks for your well reasoned reply. I can understand and agree with much of it. All those images out there must give legal nightmares to SS staff.

 

It's always been Shutterstock's ballgame and most of us will continue to play by the rules as we are given to understand them.

 

I'm grateful for Shutterstock's role in providing a little extra retirement income. That doesn't mean I can't be a little critical, especially since digital imaging, along with digital everything else, is evolving daily and occupying new territory.

 

Thanks again for your response.

 

There is nothing wrong with being critical or asking questions. If no one ever did that change would be slow in coming. It is also normal for people to dislike change in many cases. It takes us into an area we are not familiar with and it takes time to understand it and accept it.

 

Good luck in getting those extra retirement funds. I know myself how nice they are :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this