lukeb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #20 · ACLU Suing Police for Harassing Photographers | |
Hi Peter!
I agree that malls and other private property can limit you - but when the mall or hospital take public funds to build the mall or build and operate the hospital, it shouldn't be the same. They get public tax money, they are public property in my book.
As far as a Business and Occupational license, in most localities the license gives you the right and privilege to carry on your occupation within your city or county. Some cities double dip by requiring you to not only have a B&O license (including sales tax) but also require a special permit to have a photo/video shoot on public property normally only if police presence will be required (for traffic or other reasons). But even the national parks don't charge or require a permit for one photographer and one person. As far as California, I have no idea what they do there.
However, I had only a camera and tripod and myself - no grips, no loaders, no assistants, no lighting. There were no traffic issue, no limitation on public access. Consequentially, why would the police assume I was shooting commercially and need a permit versus being a private citizen. The question never arose 'what I was doing.' I only produced my B&O license after I was told to leave the public right-of-way by the police. They had no clue if I was shooting for myself or National Geographic.
And by the way, an aside, Mall of America has no problems with photos. The largest mall in the US. I wonder how many of the rent a cops make the 'no photo's' up just to show they are in charge? Especially when there are no signs posted that photography is not permitted. I there would have been such a posting, I would not have set up. That begs the question = why no signs?? They only cost a few bucks.
The issue was - I had a camera and tripod. Most likely if I hadn't used the tripod there wouldn't have been a fuss. But since when does using a tripod (or monopod) make you guilty or anything?
Peter Figen wrote:
Luke - Malls can legally limit the activities on their premises because it's private property. There's not much you can do about that. The same thing with the hospital. If you're on private property without permission you have very few rights as a private citizen.
Security guards and police, when you're on private property can ask you to leave immediately but they actually need a search warrant from a judge to even look at what might be on your camera. It's none of their business without the warrant.
If you're doing a commercial shoot within city limits you may be required to pull a permit and provide the city with an insurance certificate naming the city or state as additional insured for the length of the permit. There are legitimate reasons for requiring that, including the obvious liability reason, but also public safety and even avoiding scheduling conflicts from multiple projects. The film industry is used to having to pull permits. Still photographers need to do the same when it's a commercial endeavor. The last time I pulled a permit with the State of Ca., it was for shooting at El Matador Beach north of Malibu, where everyone shoots there every day. What the permit did was make sure that if I needed to be in THAT spot at that time, and someone else was there, unpermitted, I would have precedence. With a paying client, it would be damned embarrassing to be kicked out because I was too cheap to get a ninety dollar permit.
Your business license is NOT a permit to do commercial shoots in public. It's a license to legally have a business and pay the appropriate business taxes in your city to be in business. The permits for shooting in public are a completely separate matter from the license to be in business.
Fortunately, the permitting process for commercial shoots has gotten much easier, less expensive and more streamlined in recent years.
If you're just a photographer taking pictures, with or without a tripod, for your own enjoyment or personal art, you should never be bothered or even approached other than by the curious. It should be "Oh, it's just some dude taking pictures". Oh, and "dude" can mean females as well. ...Show more →
|
