confused to say the least !

[cmbmick]

Very confused here , I had taken a picture of The Sage building in Newcastle , and its been rejected by the selling site on trademark grounds.

Can anyone explain please?

As far as I know noone has ever got into trouble with copyright for selling their personal landmark pictures to tourists??

As I understand it if you for example to get your personal photos onto a postcard say of a landmark then you get the royalties not the people who built the landmark - or am i way off?

cheers

CMB

[candleman]

as far as i know architecture is copyright as its basically artwork.
you cant sell pictures of someone elses art.

would you sue someone who sold a photograph of your pictures?
i'd have a "cease and desist" letter there before you could say "copyright".

in saying that.. some buildings are not copyrighted.
But if it has been architecturalty designed.. the artwork is under hte architects name.
I think its shutterstock that has a list of the most common copyrighted buildings they do not accept.

[cmbmick]

well I do take your point of course.

the website needs therefore to remove the other 40 or so pictures of the same building methinks !

thank you

CMB

[candleman]

in re reading your post you mentioned "trademark"

that could indicate something else was wrong..
was there a VISA or COKE sign in the picture.. or something similar? those are all big no-no's because of the obvious "trademark" implications.

clone it out and see if they accept the same thing but with all trademarks removed.

just a thought

[cmbmick]

well its basically just a nightshot of the building, nothing more , cant see any trade marks or suchlike - just the building at night !

I shall look around see if I can put it out elsewhere.

thanks again

CMB

[steelese]

Sorry, but in most western countries, distinctive architecture receives a copyright. It has to be new enough to receive that protection. There was a small blurb about this in the latest National Geographic. Let me see if I can find a link... Sorry no link.

That being said, the architecture alone is protected. So I can't go build a building similar to the Guggenheim without permission. I would like to see the picture, maybe there is a trademark infringement that you aren't noticing.

[cmbmick]

hi

yes thanks please do take a look , theres a version here:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...c&id=571135204

I cant see anything obvious , mind it is dark so you never know!

cmb

[IrishNYC]

Maybe it's possible that others got permission to shoot and sell the photos, or they're taken by someone within the copyright holder's organization and have permission to do so.