Permits for NYC Photographers/Filmmakers

jkelly25

I thought everyone would be interested in this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/nyregion/29camera.html

esc2476

Proposed Rules for Taking Pictures in NYC
I was disturbed to read this this morning.

Andy

NYC Proposed New Photography Rulz
Read it in the NY Times

greenpea

Reminds me of what I had to go through to film a race at a ski area. The US Forrest Service (who owned the land) and ski area required $2 million in liability insurance to photograph the event plus 20% of my revenue.

William M Porter

I saw the news myself this morning and found it a bit puzzling. It doesn't seem very useful as an anti-terrorism measure. I don't think folks planning to do bad things are spending hours conspicuously taking photographs with tripods anyway. If they're worried about photographs being taken in pursuit of bad goals, they could simply give police the authority to question photographers (which they may have already).

We don't have any laws here in Dallas restricting photography, as far as I am aware. Nevertheless, the police seem to have the authority to stop and question a photographer. A couple of months ago, I went over to the campus of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School here in Dallas. The campus is part of the Dallas medical center which includes a number of hospitals including Parkland (where President Kennedy died in 1963). My wife works at the school and had told me that egrets were nesting in a woods next to a particular parking lot. I got to the parking lot, got out of the car with my camera, climbed to the top of a parking garage near the woods where the egrets are nesting, and started to case out the scene. Within two or three minutes - really, it was almost spooky - a campus policeman approached me to ask me what I was doing. I explained that I was there to shoot the birds, photographically speaking, and I offered him my photography business card and my drivers license. He was very polite, but advised me NOT to point my camera at the buildings. The rest of the time I was shooting, I had the sense that I was being watched, and not just by the birds. But that was okay with me. After all, my wife works there and I'm glad to know that the campus police are vigilant.

One of my clients in NYC (the largest and most famous alternative newsweekly in the country), is kept busy dealing with city ordinances relating to the placement of distribution boxes on the streets. When I put what I know about the requirements the city lays down for my client together with this story about restricting photographers, it looks to me as if the main motive here is a desire on the part of the lawmakers in the Big Apple to try to control what's going on. Maybe it makes sense. Perhaps there are so many photographers setting up shooting sites in the midst of public traffic lanes that they're becoming a nuisance. I think they have been requiring permits from commercial moviemakers for years.

Still, from the article, the ordinance sounds a bit vague.

Will

StevenV

it's just a money grab
rather than define things "ostensibly to avoid creating loopholes that could be exploited by professional filmmakers and photographers," they leave things vague enough that average Joe Tourist or Jane NY Resident can be pestered by semi-knowledgeable cops, thereby furthering the idiotic idea that photographers' rights on public property should be limited

and of course as you allude to, some officers will try to blame terrorism, and some people will buy that, when the whole thing just stinks of a government trying to find a way to make a buck off citizens using public property.

Note that it's not being done by any security agency but rather by the Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting - a group that you'd think would understand the need for creative rights. (Yea, right, Steven... just like the RIAA cares about the rights of the artists.)

bham

So many professional photographers in the area were so upset by the proposed rules that

"The film office held a public hearing on the proposed rules yesterday, but no one attended. The only written comments the department received were from the civil liberties group, Ms. Cho said."

It's sad that no one even showed up to get or give feedback on the subject. One man, one vote. No show, no care? Many times we take for granted our democracy and don't take the time to do our part to keep our liberties.

evoryware

probably because no one knew till this link was posted. No one posted this before the hearing that I see.

DavidTO

There were two separate threads on this, and I've merged them.

bham

evoryware wrote:

probably because no one knew till this link was posted. No one posted this before the hearing that I see.

Well if its not to late do what you can now.

mwgrice

William M Porter wrote:

I saw the news myself this morning and found it a bit puzzling. It doesn't seem very useful as an anti-terrorism measure.

No, it's not. If you want to take photos to case a location without being obtrusive, you'd use a cel phone camera or one of a bewildering variety of hidden cameras.

For instance, one of the facilities where my wife works occasionally (which I don't want to name) only allows you to use clear pens in certain areas of the building. Why? They had somebody infiltrate and smuggle out footage with a camera pen similar to this:

http://www.4hiddenspycameras.com/wir24colpenc.html

As written, the law is vague enough to be both a money grab and a tool to randomly hassle anybody with a camera.

dlscott56

bham wrote:

Well if its not to late do what you can now.

According to this the public comment period ended June 27th and the rules went into effect June 28th. But according to this they are accepting comment through August 3, 2007, and may still revise the language.

Possibly if enough people were to send a message here and/or here they would consider changing the rules to not be so deliberately vague, allowing it to be applied to just about anyone with a camera.

evoryware

Just to follow up, this was shot down yesterday and will be reworked.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/04/nyregion/04filmmakers.html?ei=5070&en=73a3b39645498c2e&ex=1186891200&adxnnl=1&emc=eta1&adxnnlx=1186254501-K5wZOLKPPt+3lAgo8oIVeA


Wife picked up on this email and was really appalled to hear about it.

The "Film Permit" rules proposed by the NYC Mayor's Office of Film, Theatre and Broadcasting (MOFTB) would require film makers and photographers using hand-held equipment to obtain city permits and to have $1 million of
liability insurance. The regulation would apply to any group of five or more people who would be using a tripod for more than ten minutes, including setup and breakdown time. It would also apply to any group of two or more people who want to use a camera in a single public location for more than a half hour. More detailed information at the links below.

DO THIS TODAY! Go to the Picture New York web site and do the following:

1) Submit formal comments to the Office of Film, Theatre and Broadcasting (MOFTB). Deadline: tomorrow Friday Aug. 3rd. This is the most important action you can take! Picture New York has set up a quick and easy online form, go to: http://citizenspeak.org/node/1123
Formal comments can also be mailed or emailed directly to:

Julianne Cho
Assistant Commissioner
Mayor’s Office of Film, Theatre & Broadcasting
1697 Broadway
New York, N.Y. 10019
jcho@film.nyc.gov

2) Sign the online petition at Picture New York (they've already collected over 18,000 signatures in less than two weeks): http://www.pictureny.org/petition/index.php

3) Drop by the Union Square rally today and bring a camera and your lunch. Thursday, Aug 2nd 11:30 till 2 PM. Organized by The Ad Hoc Task Force Against Really Bad Ideas Rules and Regulations

Additional Information and Background:

New York Civil Liberties Union has been following this closely, see their site for detailed comments and profiles of NYC producers: http://www.nyclu.org/permitrules/

NYC Mayor's Office of Film, Theatre and Broadcasting (MOFTB) web site has an article with link to the proposed rules: http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/html/news/080107_proposed_permit_rules.shtml

Thanks!

diamondmask

New law in New York being pondered.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/02/1455217

Must say I've seen this coming....

john

ShepsMom

I don't live in NY, but i think it's bunch of BS and will never happen. How can you possibly prohibit someone from photographing a city? Tripod or no tripod? Every law that was ever been made is coming from someone's compaint. Correct? Someone is not making enough dough, so they coming up with such an obscure law. Pretty soon, we wont be allowed cameras anywhere, just because someone see it as a threat.

I always knew there is no freedom "as we know it" in this country.

Angelo

diamondmask wrote:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/02/1455217

Must say I've seen this coming....

john

mod edit: merged two threads pertaining to same topic.

moose135

New York to be photo friendly again...
Mayor to Ease Permit Rules for Capturing City’s Image

Amateur photographers and independent filmmakers looking to chronicle bird life, take snapshots in Times Square or capture the distinctive thrum of New York’s streets will not need to obtain permits or insurance under new rules being proposed by the Bloomberg administration.

The rules, to be released on Tuesday for public comment, would generally allow people using hand-held equipment, including tripods, to shoot for any length of time on sidewalks and in parks as long as they leave sufficient room for pedestrians.

Full story at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/nyregion/28film.html?ref=nyregion

jsedlak

This is weird. It is the first I have heard of it, I had no trouble shooting in NYC last time I was there.

moose135

jsedlak wrote:

This is weird. It is the first I have heard of it, I had no trouble shooting in NYC last time I was there.

It wasn't in effect yet, only a proposal, so you shouldn't have had any trouble - well, not officially anyway, although sometimes the PD have been overenthusiastic about enforcing some of these rules even before they are in place.

Terrence

The newly revised policy is up on the NYC MOTB. It looks like the concerns we had are no longer. Hooray for advocacy!

claudermilk

Holy Cow! Common sense has broken out! :wow Whod've thunk it? Good for them, maybe that can infect other politicians (ok, pipe dream...).