The Right to Take Pictures

[Adrasteia]

[quote]"The right to take photographs is under assault now more than ever. People are being stopped, harassed, and even intimidated into handing over their personal property simply because they were taking photographs of subjects that made other people uncomfortable. Recent examples have included photographing industrial plants, bridges, and bus stations. For the most part, attempts to restrict photography are based on misguided fears about the supposed dangers that unrestricted photography presents to society.[/quote]


Ironically, unrestricted photography by private citizens has played an integral role in protecting the freedom, security, and well-being of all Americans. Photography in the United States has contributed to improvements in civil rights, curbed abusive child labor practices, and provided important information in investigating crimes. These images have not always been pretty and often have offended the sensibilities of governmental and commercial interests who had vested interests in a status quo that was adverse to most other people.

Photography has not contributed to a decline in public safety or economic vitality in the United States. When people think back on the acts of terrorism that have occurred over the last forty years, none have depended on or even involved photography. Restrictions on photography would not have prevented any of these acts. Similarly, some corporations have a history of abusing the rights of photographers under the guise of protecting their trade secrets. These claims are almost always meritless because entities are required to keep trade secrets from public view if they want to protect them. Trade secret laws do not give anyone the right to restrain photographers from taking photographs in public places.

The Photographer's Right is a downloadable guide that is loosely based on the ACLU's Bust Card and the Know Your Rights flyer. It may be downloaded and printed out using Adobe Acrobat Reader. You may make copies and carry them your wallet, pocket, or camera bag to give you quick access to your rights and obligations concerning confrontations over photography. You may distribute the guide to others, provided that such distribution is not done for commercial gain and credit is given to the author."

[url="http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf"]http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf[/url]
(click to download)

source: [url="http://www.artworld.si/the_photographers_right-t919.art"]http://www.artworld.si/the_photographers_right-t919.art[/url]

[Tami]

I read that awhile ago, and do have a copy of the Photographer's Rights in my puter. I think that alot of the changes we're seeing in regards to photos being taken--particularly of buildings and public transit systems, is society's fear of terrorism and crime.

Thus far, I haven't run into any problems (i.e. people asking me why I'm taking pictures of this that or the next thing.) I take alot of pictures of old buildings, in fact there are some I need to get out and shoot this weekend or perhaps this evening because they are in danger of being torn down.

I think also that the mentality in regards to photography & photographers has alot to do with where one is shooting. Obviously someone shooting lots of pictures of the Tube in London will garner more negative attention than someone shooting pictures of the SkyTrain in Vancouver. It also depends alot on who you are; we have loads of "location shooters" here due to the film industry so alot more goes unquestioned-which could at some point in time end up being a not so good thing, but I think that if people pay attention to things which are going on, and ask questions when they feel it's warranted, both sides should be happy. A bona fide photographer certainly shouldn't have any problem giving a satisfactory explanation as to why they are shooting something. It's those who have less than exemplary reasons for shooting who will be the intimidated one, as they prefer to remain anonymous and unseen.