Location Releases (Public/Private Property)

Is it correct that Pond5 does not distinguish between footage shot on public and private property? In other words, Pond5 does not require a release for footage shot when physically standing on private property?

The "property release" is the only release Pond5 asks for that is close to serving this purpose. However, the site describes the use of this release in its FAQ as follows:

"There should be no copyrighted music or sound on the audio track without an accompanying property release, and no recognizable voices without a model release. Likewise, there can't be any trademarks, logos or brands depicted in the footage without a release."

This leads me to think that Pond5 does not care where you shot the footage; its concern isn't physical property but copyrighted property.

As an example from my footage, I have some great architectural footage shot while on the property of a private resort. Most companies would require a release from the resort saying it was okay for me to be there. The key consideration often asked is, "Is the object in your footage recognizable and can your footage be demonstrated as having been acquired while physically on private property?"

However, it seems I don't need such permission with Pond5, and I can use that footage.

Any responses? Any information would be appreciated.

- Matthew Bowman

If you go by other sites and what they have been sued for....property releases are more to cover your tail than theirs. I would have it, if you think you could get sued. But I do not think that P5 is AS concerned as other sites....yet.

If no property release is used and it should have been then the last user (ie/buyer here) will be held responsible for an litigation. Here's a fairly good guideline to go by, hope it helps

Property Release Requirements

Public property Government buildings, public schools, parks = No

Private property - identifiable Homes, office buildings, private schools, universities & the surrounding property, cars, boats, private & corporate jets & planes. Studio locations with identifiable features = Yes

Private property - unidentifiable Locations with no identifiable features = No

Private property from public accessible location eg street or motorway Building (s) in an image whose central focus is not these buildings. For example landscapes and skylines = No

Famous locations, landmarks Unless properties classified as being in the public domain = Yes

Corporate logos & insignias Any trademarked logos or Insignias = Yes

Historic Locations Monument or historic home. Need to check with Property owner = Yes / No

Publicly displayed art Privately-owned art that is publicly displayed. Excludes art classified as being in the public domain = Yes

As a sidebar to Frenchtoast's post above, the Eiffel Tower in daylight is fair game. No property release is neccessary. At night, however, the LIGHTING itself
is covered by copyright (all the flashing lights, like flash bulbs). The French government has been strict about going after violators. Go figure.

Who knew you could copyright LIGHT?

Just because McDonalds builds a restaurant on a public street does not no should restrict access, photos and videos on that public street in fear the "arches" will be captured. many site are way overboard on that kind of restrictions. Now a closeup where the arches are the main subject is different. Many sites are loosing millions on restrictions that are far too tight. Editorial content is a valid media. Just look at the news and see how many editorial clips are used showing the Ford emblem, McD arches, Starbacks, and even the Eiffel tower. Editorial is a valid and useful media. P5 is very good at putting an editorial byline at the bottom of footage that does not have model and property releases. The buyers have been warned about possible miss use of non-released footage. Bottomline, even trespassing does not make editorial captures fair game. Sure glad many (not all by any means) do not accept editorial, it's their loss.

What about general "office"-type buildings shot from the public sidewalk where any names of the building aren't in the shot?

Don and OD think this line should explain

Private property from public accessible location eg street or motorway Building (s) in an image whose central focus is not these buildings. For example landscapes and skylines = No

Star, I knew about the Eiffel Tower and I've also heard the same about the Sydney Opera House at night. And not sure if its passed yet, but the Egyptian government was trying to stop all commericial photography of the pyramids and sphinx. Go figure

I suppose if P5 isn't worried about location releases and buyers are responsible for how they use footage bought here, then I won't worry about getting them for the purpose of selling footage here. I mean, if P5 doesn't even provide a method for giving location releases (not "property releases") to buyers, why should I worry about it?

As a general rule, though, fyi, I'll be getting location releases for cooler footage that I might want to use for other things.

Again, I'm used to working according to the principle that you need a release "if the contents of your footage are from a recognizable location and the physical placement of the camera can be demonstrated to have been on private property." But, this makes it easy. Get ready, Pond5, for a stream of new uploads.

For all purposes a property and "location" release is the same. I've never seen a location release but have worked with property relase. I think it all semantics and not really important , welcome and lets see the footage.