Archive for the ‘Photography and the Law’ Category
August 30th, 2010 | 
Author: The War on Photography is expanding to Australia which has enacted numerous laws to restrict photography. Artists are fighting back with a rally and videos such as this:
This article in the Sydney Morning Herald explains the situation:
”Photography used to be considered a noble profession; we were watching life,” Duncan said. ”Now we’re treated like predators and paedophiles.”
Duncan will lead a group of photographers, Arts Freedom Australia, in a protest in Sydney on August 29 to speak out against what they say is an unnecessary intrusion by bureaucracy.
Posted in 
It seems that police departments are looking for any excuse to steal (err…. confiscate) cameras these days. A photojournalist in Canterbury, New Hampshire had his camera taken by police because he was photographing an accident scene. According to the story on WMUR:
Blackden’s lawyer said that state police violated her client’s First Amendment rights when they took the camera.
Conte said troopers did the right thing.
“At that time, when those pictures were being taken, that family of that person did not know there had been an accident, and they did not know that person had died during that accident, so we have a big concern to work for the families of these victims, and to assure there is privacy,” Conte said.
Blackden said he did not take any pictures of the victim, and even if he did, he would never allow them to be published.
“As someone who has been involved in law enforcement and the fire department, I would never disrespect a victim or their family like that,” Blackden said.
Blackden and his attorney, Penny Dean, said that they went to police to try and get the camera back, but were refused.
If it is a public scene then the photographer has every right to take pictures. There are no exceptions that protect accident scenes that have not been specifically cordoned off by police. And why are the cops failing to return the camera? Are they saving it to give to one of their kids for Christmas?
For taking pictures of the building FROM A PUBLIC SIDEWALK. Note the conversation and how the security gguards are trapped by their own LIES:
You’re taking pictures”, he said.“Yeah, that’s right” I replied, “So why are you bothering me?”
“You can’t take pictures here without a permit”, he said. At which point the conversation went something like this:
Me: “Permit? You’re out of your league. I don’t need a permit to photograph. I’m standing on the sidewalk.”"
Guard: “Well, we have polices and you can’t take pictures of the building without a permit.”
Me: “You don’t know what you’re talking about. I’m standing on the public sidewalk. I can take whatever pictures I want. If I was on casino property you could ask me to leave but I’m standing on the sidewalk. If you want to call Gardena P.D., go ahead, or maybe you want to call your supervisor.”
At this point the 2nd guard says: “We can report you for suspicious activity.”
So all of a sudden the permit is no longer at issue… The liar needed to come up with another excuse. What is obvious at this point though is that the security guards are not ignorant of the law as some would have us believe but rather that they are deliberately bullying photographers. The photographer brilliantly followed up:
Me: “Larry Flint, the guy who owns this place, has spent millions of dollars fighting for 1st Amendment rights, you guys know that, right?”Both guards nod their heads and one of them acknowledges verbally: “Yes”.
Me: “Well, photographers rights are protected by the 1st Amendment so please stop bothering me.”
PRICELESS!!
Besides the fact that they lie about their budgets, are responsible for some of the largest tax increases in NYC history during an ongoing recession, operate a highly inefficient transit system, cut services, commit copyfraud, and threaten photographers who publish pictures with a subway train route symbol in the background…
We despise them for continuing to ban photography from their bridges as evidenced by these signs.
Some of the most beautiful panoramic views of New York City can be taken from the bridges yet the MTA is restricting that view to professional photographers who have the means to pay thousands of dollars in permit fees. It is an absolute outrage. The bridges operated by the Department of Transportation which include landmarks such as the Brooklyn Bridge include NO SUCH RESTRICTIONS.
The MTA should be ashamed of itself for continuing their war against photography!
A railfan recently attempted to obtain a photo permit for PATH, the Port Authority Trans Hudson Line that runs between New York and New Jersey. Although they give lip service to a permitting process, the reality is that they do not give permits to amateur photographers and this case proves it beyond a doubt.
This is even more tragic now that PATH is replacing aging equipment with new cars. The ability of railfans to record and document the equipment that is being scrapped before it is lost forever is being prevented by this PATHetic government agency. Railroad photography is extremely important in documenting the history of railroads through the years – the actions of PATH are inexcusable
We wish to express our THANKS to Carlos Miller and his website Photography Is Not a Crime for bringing the Metrorail situation to what we hope is a satisfactory conclusion. The protest organized by Carlos was a success and made its point. Read the details and see images from the scene here.
And promises to stop harassing photographers. Although they do state that they will continue to question all photographers, which unfortunately opens the door for harassment if not handled properly
Here is Metrorail’s response to the NPPA
Have a story to share that we did not cover? Want to discuss something in greater detail? Want to compare Nikon vs. Canon? Post it in our forum - all are welcome.
