Is photography a crime? Are we Criminals?

[JG271]

My dad works for air traffic control, and twice a car has pulled up outside the building, someone lay on the floor and took photographs, then got back in and drove off!

Very odd.

However, Is there really a link between photography and terrorism? Chances are you can find lots of photographs and maybe even plans of buildings on the internet. Are they going to stop people looking at buildings incase they remember them and could plant bombs? I think the government may be a bit paranoid.

 

[glennyboiwpg]

These days you really need to know what your rights are if you are challenged. The following links are very useful...

guide for UK photographers

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php

guide for US photographers

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

Does anyone know a Canadian version of these sites?

 

[davidjearly]

Does anyone know a Canadian version of these sites?

This site may be of use to you.

David

 

[sonor]

Does anyone know a Canadian version of these sites?

There's a lot of information here - http://ambientlight.ca/laws.shtml

 

[sonor]

This site may be of use to you.

David

You just beat me to it

 

[edesignuk]

There were a couple of chaps with their dSLR cams on the tube the other day taking sly pictures of people without their consent.

Is that right?

If it were me they were taking pictures of and I noticed I wouldn't have been too pleased. It's one thing to be caught in a photo while someone is shooting out and about, but these guys were on their own (meaning they weren't taking pictures of friends in the carriage that other people might just get caught in), they were both just taking random pictures and they were doing it in such a manor as to try and hide what they were doing (just pointing the camera in the general direction of what they wanted to take, not actually looking through the view finder).

They have some balls doing that on a crowded tube, people can get pissy <punch n smash>.

 

[ftaok]

There were a couple of chaps with their dSLR cams on the tube the other day taking sly pictures of people without their consent.

Is that right?

If it were me they were taking pictures of and I noticed I wouldn't have been too pleased. It's one thing to be caught in a photo while someone is shooting out and about, but these guys were on their own (meaning they weren't taking pictures of friends in the carriage that other people might just get caught in), they were both just taking random pictures and they were doing it in such a manor as to try and hide what they were doing (just pointing the camera in the general direction of what they wanted to take, not actually looking through the view finder).

They have some balls doing that on a crowded tube, people can get pissy <punch n smash>.

I guess that if you're in public, you have no expectation of privacy. With that said, what were these guys taking pictures for? Maybe they wanted to take random pictures of people in candid moments. That's probably OK.

I can't see any harm coming from being randomly photographed in public. I suppose if they followed a family with little kids around for the purpose of splashing the photos on the Internet, that could be construed as harrassment, but it sounds like these guys were shooting random photos.

ft

 

[edesignuk]

I guess that if you're in public, you have no expectation of privacy. With that said, what were these guys taking pictures for? Maybe they wanted to take random pictures of people in candid moments. That's probably OK.

No idea what they were taking pictures for, but the way in which they were doing it, and where they were doing it didn't sit right.

There was no view to take a picture of that people might be caught in, it was a busy undergroud tube. They would tip each other off about where to get a snap and then just sort of roughly aim their lens in the right direction so as not to get the persons attention while snapping.

To my mind, that's bang out of order, and should rightly lead to a slap from a random angry man on his way home.

 

[GoCubsGo]

A french soldier actually came and told me to put away my point and shoot after i snapped this pic of the Tour de Montparnaisse, in Paris.

Guess he was right.

A photo like that will actually get you into trouble if seen by the wrong person. It goes back to general fear and you're just pushing it.

There were a couple of chaps with their dSLR cams on the tube the other day taking sly pictures of people without their consent.

Is that right?

If it were me they were taking pictures of and I noticed I wouldn't have been too pleased. It's one thing to be caught in a photo while someone is shooting out and about, but these guys were on their own (meaning they weren't taking pictures of friends in the carriage that other people might just get caught in), they were both just taking random pictures and they were doing it in such a manor as to try and hide what they were doing (just pointing the camera in the general direction of what they wanted to take, not actually looking through the view finder).

They have some balls doing that on a crowded tube, people can get pissy <punch n smash>.

I believe this boils down to photographer's etiquette. Is it neither right or wrong.

I guess that if you're in public, you have no expectation of privacy. With that said, what were these guys taking pictures for? Maybe they wanted to take random pictures of people in candid moments. That's probably OK.

I can't see any harm coming from being randomly photographed in public. I suppose if they followed a family with little kids around for the purpose of splashing the photos on the Internet, that could be construed as harrassment, but it sounds like these guys were shooting random photos.

ft

While in public you have to lower your expectations of privacy? I don't totally agree with that statement. I think you have to be more aware of your surroundings. If people were on a tube taking a random candid I would simply ask them not to take one of me.

 

[ftaok]

While in public you have to lower your expectations of privacy? I don't totally agree with that statement. I think you have to be more aware of your surroundings. If people were on a tube taking a random candid I would simply ask them not to take one of me.

I don't think that you can expect to have total privacy while out in public. I think that if you're out in public, just minding your own business, someone taking a photo of you is no big deal. If they ask me if I'd mind, then all the better. It's not like I'm doing anything shady.

But I do agree that there are situations where it's not proper to take photos of strangers.

 

[Artful Dodger]

The only time I didn't ask to draw or photo someone was when I had to draw something for class and at the time I asked one gentlemen if I could. I had no idea that he would be joined by some friends very soon after and for reference sake I took a few snaps. While he didn't mind the other guys playing chess with him did but since "they weren't" the intended object, they relaxed even though it was outside of a coffee shop for all to see. I think most people, once told you're not turning them in for anything, are okay with it but the police are something else.
I was trying to paint an old train station once and got the third degree by the police. They tried to make me leave and I refused. Next more units showed up and last the shift supervisor. For him I explained everything once again my intent once again and then told him if his "boys" were a bit nicer, I was willing to show them that I actually worked for the place that owned the building but they didn't care. I happen to have my pay-stub in my wallet and showed him at which time he wasn't very happy with me nor his troops but called it a day and drove off.
I guess it doesn't matter if you're on public ground or not as long as one person thinks you're doing something out of the norm you're plotting something of mass destruction.
I really think it comes down to those that are not creative but happily ignorant will never understand nor want to and can justify their own blatant stupidity (which is amazing in of it self).

 

[OldCorpse]

There is NO expectation of privacy in a public place. Anybody is allowed to take photos of you, as long as it happens in a public space. Whether that sits "right" with you or not is irrelevant - the photographer has a 100% right to photograph you under such circumstances. If you "smack" him, you are liable for assault, and charges can be pressed.

In fact, your private house can be legally photographed at will, as long as the photographer is taking the photos from a public space (such a street or sidewalk).

You can no more prevent a photographer from photographing you in a public space, than you can prevent someone from recording sound in that space, or overhearing what you say, or using his eyes to look at you - the technical extension of eyes and ears - cameras and recorders don't change anything legally.

 

[UrsaMajor]

This is nothing new in states. One of the few things I collect is WWII citizen notices, rations and the like. I have several notices that inform people to report people taking photos and not to take photos around certain areas.

It's more of a false security trying to enforce something like this. How can you enforce things like this when cameras are so small in most cell phones and able to be hidden in anything, that to me is of more concern than a full DSLR setup.

 

[BrianKonarsMac]

that poster makes me sick.

 

[BrianKonarsMac]

This is nothing new in states. One of the few things I collect is WWII citizen notices, rations and the like. I have several notices that inform people to report people taking photos and not to take photos around certain areas.

It's more of a false security trying to enforce something like this. How can you enforce things like this when cameras are so small in most cell phones and able to be hidden in anything, that to me is of more concern than a full DSLR setup.

EXACTLY.

Do people really think a terrorist is going to go out into broad daylight with a professional setup and be like HI ALL, I'M A FREAKING TERRORIST!

I would image they'd try to be as inconspicuous as possible, and likely have miniature photo/video devices. Then again I'm sure the government is just looking out for it's citizens...right?

All I know is those asian tour busses better be careful, one minute they're standing outside of disney land taking pictures at the front entrance, the next they're handcuffed and beaten with a police baton for terrorist activities. HOLY **** THAT GUY DOESN'T LOOK OR TALK LIKE ME AND HE IS TAKING PICTURES, TERRORIST!

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

You can no more prevent a photographer from photographing you in a public space, than you can prevent someone from recording sound in that space, or overhearing what you say, or using his eyes to look at you - the technical extension of eyes and ears - cameras and recorders don't change anything legally.

In the states it is illegal to record someone's voice without their knowledge.

 

[jbernie]

There is NO expectation of privacy in a public place. Anybody is allowed to take photos of you, as long as it happens in a public space. Whether that sits "right" with you or not is irrelevant - the photographer has a 100% right to photograph you under such circumstances. If you "smack" him, you are liable for assault, and charges can be pressed.

With a few exceptions, such as trying to take photos looking up/down peoples clothing and the like.


The more you try to hide (poorly)the fact that you are doing something the more people become suspicious of what you are doing. If you walk around in the middle of winter with a balaclava on and covering your face are you just cold or a you a criminal?

Be polite to any security/police person who stops by, don't try to hide the photos, yes some of them can be power hungry jerks but don't go out of your way to cause more problems.

 

[kylos]

With a few exceptions, such as trying to take photos looking up/down peoples clothing and the like.

Except in Oklahoma; apparently that's legal there.

 

[compuwar]

In the states it is illegal to record someone's voice without their knowledge.

No, it's not[1]. There are circumstances where it is, mostly dealing with telephone calls, private property, etc., but that also varies by jurisdiction and by who's doing it (the government under Title III, a private citizen in not in a dual-consent state...)

There is no section of the US code that I can find that deals with simply recording someone's voice in public, or you'd have to get a hundred signatures to pull out a camorder and point it at someone with sound recording turned on. I'd love to see a citation to the USC that asserts what you say is true though.

You might find the following decision interesting in that regard:

http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/509/509.F2d.605.74--2557.html

[1] In my opinion, I'm not a lawyer, it's not a legal opinion, but I've read a fair portion of the US Code and haven't ever seen a blanket prohibition on recording someone's voice.

 

[Annndy!]

A friend and I were taking photos with a tripod on a bridge overtop Interstate 95 one night. Several officers pulled up and flashed their lights, got out and asked what we were doing. When I responded with, "Taking some pictures", one looked relieved, and the other two laughed. Apparently someone had called them and said we were setting up a ladder and trying to jump off the bridge!

 

[ipodtoucher]

A while couple weeks back a site i read, Photojojo, posted a story on the "The Ten Legal Commandments of Photography." I assume this is mostly for Americans, but you never know haha.

http://photojojo.com/content/tips/legal-rights-of-photographers/

 

[jbernie]

A while couple weeks back a site i read, Photojojo, posted a story on the "The Ten Legal Commandments of Photography." I assume this is mostly for Americans, but you never know haha.

http://photojojo.com/content/tips/legal-rights-of-photographers/

thank you! I saved a copy of what they said plus some of the other documents they link too.

 

[DataThief]

Used to get stopped a lot when taking photos of planes from public land. But its gotten kind of insane now, I am part of what is called "The National Map Corps" we take gps readings of sites (schools, buildings, powerline towers) to update the US Geological Survey maps. I have been pulled over by the cops in my area so many times they all know my vehicle by sight.

 

[eddx]

Here's a recent shot that caused a bit of bother: a gas terminal, shot from a public right of way. Local security and the police found me (hell, I wasn't hiding...), and I got searched. Worse, I was 'sniffed' by a huge police dog.

I was shooting pix for a book about the coast and, after a couple of phone calls, I was allowed to leave. I think it's important to stick to public rights of way if you're close to 'sensitive' sites like this...

This is shocking, I have to wonder if you showed the police the picture on the back of your digital camera? I say this because it seems more of a general landscape that happens to include a power station rather than a detailed photograph of the power station. I like the photograph a lot by the way.

It's as if there is no crime and police are just out to label the innocent photographer as something we are clearly not

 

[Hankster]

Sadly, because of idiot people who want to kill strangers by the numbers we cannot be too careful. Don't blame the people for trying to be careful and safeguard their country. Blame the idiots who want to kill people for no good reason.

People complain their government didn't do enough if a terrorist attack hits and people get killed. People complain their government is going overboard when they are trying to prevent a terrorist attack. There is no win-win...