Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
Marketers may feature general public locations without permission so long as they do not denigrate the building or area in question. Frequently used examples include the Houses of Parliament, the Millennium Stadium, Edinburgh Castle and Stormont Castle.
Pictures that are available from picture libraries may be featured in ads so long as they do not denigrate the owners of the property or the business that is conducted there (for example, the peace process talks that have taken place at Stormont Castle).
The Lord Chamberlain’s Office has indicated that featuring royal properties in marketing communications is acceptable only in exceptional circumstances. Marketers should check with the Lord Chamberlain’s Office on
www.royal.gov.uk
When it comes to the recognisable property of members of the public, marketers should take care not to feature them without permission. In 2008, the ASA rejected a complaint about the use of privately owned land to advertise an off-road vehicle. Because the image had been doctored (for example, to remove farm buildings) and because only a small amount of land was shown, the ASA concluded that the owner’s right to privacy had not been infringed (Colt Car Company, 23 April 2008). ASA decisions Quentine Marks (26 May 2004) and PoolerWatson.com (21 July 2004) suggest that, although using photographs that feature several properties or streets is likely to be acceptable, marketers are best advised to get permission if they use an individual’s property as the sole or main feature in an ad. Exceptions include a brochure for a new housing development: the marketer convinced the ASA that, because the featured house was of historical interest and characteristic of the village, it did not have to obtain the owner’s permission (Barratt Development plc, 24 July 2002).
Last modified : 29 March 2012