Images displaying third-party ownership or branding not deleted - Wagon Train #4

@Marco- Hi again, A small update on this post, an investigation is on-going for this issue. Therefore, in the meantime, we ask to please refrain from submitting any Watermark deletion requests while we continue to investigate. Thank you for your understanding!

@Maya: Thanks for your response. I'll hold off the contributions for watermarked photos for now. That being said, I see the guide (https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/images-videos/image-guidelines/G27LPBQZA7EAZGJW?ref_=helpms_helpart_inline#) has been changed two days ago. It is now no longer allowed to delete photos with watermarks from companies that don't have anything to do with producing or first-time distributing a title. As the guide now states it: "Watermarks of the title's creators, such as the production company, or those generated by an official media distribution provider (such as a TV channel or streaming service) are acceptable." Why was this policy changed? I think you have opened a (potential) can of worms here. Every media distributor obviously has its own watermark/logo and while some are relatively subtle, others aren't and are rather obnoxious. Also, in some countries (the Netherlands, for example) there are often two logos shown, one for the specific broadcasting company and one for the Dutch public broadcasting organization (the Dutch PBS). Then there are lots of tv shows that have been aired on dozens and dozens of channels in scores of countries, so potentially they can have photos on their page with dozens and dozens of different watermarks that differ in size, look/feel and location on the picture. All this can make tv shows' photo galleries look very unorganized and amateurish. I therefore fail to see why this is now allowed, especially since the number of photos on IMDb doesn't seem a problem (there are over 21 million listed already: https://www.imdb.com/pressroom/stats/).