The Photographer's Right
BELphotos
Registered Users Posts: 102 Major grins
Hi All....
When I was the editor and general manager of an emergency services website and print newspaper, many of our correspondents would find themselves in conflict with someone they photographed. The following is an article I penned in November 2005 pertaining to that problem. I thought I would pass this useful information on to you.
Bruce
The Photographer's Right
by Bruce Lukszewicz (November 2005)
Many times I will get a panic call from a correspondent telling me someone they have snapped a photo of is going to sue them or have them arrested. Usually, assuring the caller that we are still in the USA and being reasonably sure that the Constitution is still a valid document and the Government has not been overthrown last night generally has a calming effect and sets things back on the right course.
However, lacking in legal skills, I was determined to find someone who has the legal skill, and also has a love of photography. This is where Bert P. Krages, Esq enters the picture. No pun intended.
Mr. Krages, has graciously allowed me to reprint his “guide” with reference to the law and photography. Remember, this is only a guide and individual laws in your state may vary.
Your Rights and Remedies When Stopped or Confronted for Photography
About this Guide
Confrontations that impair the constitutional right to make images are becoming more common. To fight the abuse of your right to free expression, you need to know your rights to take photographs and the remedies available if your rights are infringed.
The General Rule
The general rule in the United States is that anyone may take photographs of whatever they want when they are in a public place or places where they have permission to take photographs. Absent a specific legal prohibition such as a statute or ordinance, you are legally entitled to take photographs. Examples of places that are traditionally considered public are streets, sidewalks, and public parks.
Property owners may legally prohibit photography on their premises but have no right to prohibit others from photographing their property from other locations. Whether you need permission from property owners to take photographs while on their premises depends on the circumstances. In most places, you may reasonably assume that taking photographs is allowed and that you do not need explicit permission. However, this is a judgment call and you should request permission when the circumstances uggest that the owner is likely to object. In any case, when a property owner tells you not to take photographs while on the premises, you are legally obligated to honor the request.
Some Exceptions to the Rule
There are some exceptions to the general rule. A significant one is that commanders of military installations can prohibit photographs of specific areas when they deem it necessary to protect national security. The U.S. Department of Energy can also prohibit photography of designated nuclear facilities although the publicly visible areas of nuclear facilities are usually not designated as such.
Members of the public have a very limited scope of privacy rights when they are in public places. Basically, anyone can be photographed without their consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, and inside their homes.
Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can almost always be photographed lawfully from public places: accident and fire scenes, children, celebrities, bridges and other infrastructure, residential and commercial buildings, industrial facilities and public utilities transportation facilities (e.g., airports), Superfund sites, criminal activities, [and] law enforcement officers.
Who Is Likely to Violate Your Rights
Most confrontations are started by security guards and employees of organizations who fear photography. The most common reason given is security but often such persons have no articulated reason. Security is rarely a legitimate reason for restricting photography. Taking a photograph is not a terrorist act nor can a business legitimately assert that taking a photograph of a subject in public view infringes on its trade secrets.
On occasion, law enforcement officers may object to photography but most understand that people have the right to take photographs and do not interfere with photographers. They do have the right to keep you away from areas where you may impede their activities or endanger safety. However, they do not have the legal right to prohibit you from taking photographs from other locations.
They Have Limited Rights to Bother, Question, or Detain You
Although anyone has the right to approach a person in a public place and ask questions, persistent and unwanted conduct done without a legitimate purpose is a crime in many states if it causes serious annoyance. You are under no obligation to explain the purpose of your photography nor do you have to disclose your identity except in states that require so upon request by a law enforcement officer.
If the conduct goes beyond mere questioning, all states have laws that make coercion and harassment criminal offenses. The specific elements vary among the states but in general it is unlawful for anyone to instill a fear that they may injure you, damage or take your property, or falsely accuse you of a crime just because you are taking photographs.
Private parties have very limited rights to detain you against your will and may be subject to criminal and civil charges should they attempt to do so. Although the laws in most states authorize citizen’s arrests, such authority is very narrow. In general, citizen’s arrests can be made only for felonies or crimes committed in the person’s presence. Failure to abide by these requirements usually means that the person is liable for a tort such as false imprisonment.
They Have No Right to Confiscate Your Film
Sometimes agents acting for entities such as owners of industrial plants and shopping malls may ask you to hand over your film. Absent a court order, private parties have no right to confiscate your film. Taking your film directly or indirectly by threatening to use force or call a law enforcement agency can constitute criminal offenses such as theft and coercion. It can likewise constitute a civil tort such as conversion. Law enforcement officers may have the authority to seize film when making an arrest but otherwise must obtain a court order.
Your Legal Remedies If Harassed
If someone has threatened, intimidated, or detained you because you were taking photographs, they may be liable for crimes such as kidnapping, coercion, and theft. In such cases, you should report them to the police.
You may also have civil remedies against such persons and their employers. The torts for which you may be entitled to compensation include assault, conversion, false imprisonment, and violation of your constitutional rights.
Other Remedies If Harassed
If you are disinclined to take legal action, there are still things you can do that contribute to protecting the right to take photographs.
(1) Call the local newspaper and see if they are interested in running a story. Many newspapers feel that civil liberties are worthy of serious coverage.
(2) Write to or call the supervisor of the person involved, or the legal or public relations department of the entity, and complain about the event.
(3) Make the event publicly known on an Internet forum that deals with photography or civil rights issues.
How to Handle Confrontations
Most confrontations can be defused by being courteous and respectful. If the party becomes pushy, combative, or unreasonably hostile, consider calling the police. Above all, use good judgment and don’t allow an event to escalate into violence.
In the event you are threatened with detention or asked to surrender your film, asking the following questions can help ensure that you will have the evidence to enforce your legal rights:
1. What is the person’s name?
2. Who is their employer?
3. Are you free to leave? If not, how do they intend to stop you if you decide to leave? What legal basis do they assert for the detention?
4. Likewise, if they demand your film, what legal basis do they assert for the confiscation?
Disclaimer
This is a general education guide about the right to take photographs and is necessarily limited in scope. For more information about the laws that affect photography, I refer you to my book, Legal Handbook for Photographers (Amherst Media, 2002).
This guide is not intended to be legal advice nor does it create an attorney client relationship. Readers should seek the advice of a competent attorney when they need legal advice regarding a specific situation.
Published by: Bert P. Krages II, Attorney at Law, 6665 S.W. Hampton Street, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97223; www.krages.com ; © 2003 Bert P. Krages II; krages@onemain.com
When I was the editor and general manager of an emergency services website and print newspaper, many of our correspondents would find themselves in conflict with someone they photographed. The following is an article I penned in November 2005 pertaining to that problem. I thought I would pass this useful information on to you.
Bruce
The Photographer's Right
by Bruce Lukszewicz (November 2005)
Many times I will get a panic call from a correspondent telling me someone they have snapped a photo of is going to sue them or have them arrested. Usually, assuring the caller that we are still in the USA and being reasonably sure that the Constitution is still a valid document and the Government has not been overthrown last night generally has a calming effect and sets things back on the right course.
However, lacking in legal skills, I was determined to find someone who has the legal skill, and also has a love of photography. This is where Bert P. Krages, Esq enters the picture. No pun intended.
Mr. Krages, has graciously allowed me to reprint his “guide” with reference to the law and photography. Remember, this is only a guide and individual laws in your state may vary.
Your Rights and Remedies When Stopped or Confronted for Photography
About this Guide
Confrontations that impair the constitutional right to make images are becoming more common. To fight the abuse of your right to free expression, you need to know your rights to take photographs and the remedies available if your rights are infringed.
The General Rule
The general rule in the United States is that anyone may take photographs of whatever they want when they are in a public place or places where they have permission to take photographs. Absent a specific legal prohibition such as a statute or ordinance, you are legally entitled to take photographs. Examples of places that are traditionally considered public are streets, sidewalks, and public parks.
Property owners may legally prohibit photography on their premises but have no right to prohibit others from photographing their property from other locations. Whether you need permission from property owners to take photographs while on their premises depends on the circumstances. In most places, you may reasonably assume that taking photographs is allowed and that you do not need explicit permission. However, this is a judgment call and you should request permission when the circumstances uggest that the owner is likely to object. In any case, when a property owner tells you not to take photographs while on the premises, you are legally obligated to honor the request.
Some Exceptions to the Rule
There are some exceptions to the general rule. A significant one is that commanders of military installations can prohibit photographs of specific areas when they deem it necessary to protect national security. The U.S. Department of Energy can also prohibit photography of designated nuclear facilities although the publicly visible areas of nuclear facilities are usually not designated as such.
Members of the public have a very limited scope of privacy rights when they are in public places. Basically, anyone can be photographed without their consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, and inside their homes.
Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can almost always be photographed lawfully from public places: accident and fire scenes, children, celebrities, bridges and other infrastructure, residential and commercial buildings, industrial facilities and public utilities transportation facilities (e.g., airports), Superfund sites, criminal activities, [and] law enforcement officers.
Who Is Likely to Violate Your Rights
Most confrontations are started by security guards and employees of organizations who fear photography. The most common reason given is security but often such persons have no articulated reason. Security is rarely a legitimate reason for restricting photography. Taking a photograph is not a terrorist act nor can a business legitimately assert that taking a photograph of a subject in public view infringes on its trade secrets.
On occasion, law enforcement officers may object to photography but most understand that people have the right to take photographs and do not interfere with photographers. They do have the right to keep you away from areas where you may impede their activities or endanger safety. However, they do not have the legal right to prohibit you from taking photographs from other locations.
They Have Limited Rights to Bother, Question, or Detain You
Although anyone has the right to approach a person in a public place and ask questions, persistent and unwanted conduct done without a legitimate purpose is a crime in many states if it causes serious annoyance. You are under no obligation to explain the purpose of your photography nor do you have to disclose your identity except in states that require so upon request by a law enforcement officer.
If the conduct goes beyond mere questioning, all states have laws that make coercion and harassment criminal offenses. The specific elements vary among the states but in general it is unlawful for anyone to instill a fear that they may injure you, damage or take your property, or falsely accuse you of a crime just because you are taking photographs.
Private parties have very limited rights to detain you against your will and may be subject to criminal and civil charges should they attempt to do so. Although the laws in most states authorize citizen’s arrests, such authority is very narrow. In general, citizen’s arrests can be made only for felonies or crimes committed in the person’s presence. Failure to abide by these requirements usually means that the person is liable for a tort such as false imprisonment.
They Have No Right to Confiscate Your Film
Sometimes agents acting for entities such as owners of industrial plants and shopping malls may ask you to hand over your film. Absent a court order, private parties have no right to confiscate your film. Taking your film directly or indirectly by threatening to use force or call a law enforcement agency can constitute criminal offenses such as theft and coercion. It can likewise constitute a civil tort such as conversion. Law enforcement officers may have the authority to seize film when making an arrest but otherwise must obtain a court order.
Your Legal Remedies If Harassed
If someone has threatened, intimidated, or detained you because you were taking photographs, they may be liable for crimes such as kidnapping, coercion, and theft. In such cases, you should report them to the police.
You may also have civil remedies against such persons and their employers. The torts for which you may be entitled to compensation include assault, conversion, false imprisonment, and violation of your constitutional rights.
Other Remedies If Harassed
If you are disinclined to take legal action, there are still things you can do that contribute to protecting the right to take photographs.
(1) Call the local newspaper and see if they are interested in running a story. Many newspapers feel that civil liberties are worthy of serious coverage.
(2) Write to or call the supervisor of the person involved, or the legal or public relations department of the entity, and complain about the event.
(3) Make the event publicly known on an Internet forum that deals with photography or civil rights issues.
How to Handle Confrontations
Most confrontations can be defused by being courteous and respectful. If the party becomes pushy, combative, or unreasonably hostile, consider calling the police. Above all, use good judgment and don’t allow an event to escalate into violence.
In the event you are threatened with detention or asked to surrender your film, asking the following questions can help ensure that you will have the evidence to enforce your legal rights:
1. What is the person’s name?
2. Who is their employer?
3. Are you free to leave? If not, how do they intend to stop you if you decide to leave? What legal basis do they assert for the detention?
4. Likewise, if they demand your film, what legal basis do they assert for the confiscation?
Disclaimer
This is a general education guide about the right to take photographs and is necessarily limited in scope. For more information about the laws that affect photography, I refer you to my book, Legal Handbook for Photographers (Amherst Media, 2002).
This guide is not intended to be legal advice nor does it create an attorney client relationship. Readers should seek the advice of a competent attorney when they need legal advice regarding a specific situation.
Published by: Bert P. Krages II, Attorney at Law, 6665 S.W. Hampton Street, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97223; www.krages.com ; © 2003 Bert P. Krages II; krages@onemain.com
http://www.BELphotos.com
"Never leave home without a camera"
"Never leave home without a camera"
0
Comments
I know others may be familiar with this as it has been posted here a couple times before but never as clearly as this (always in a response to some other thread).
I will say this. I carry copies (yes multiple, not just one) with me all the time. One in my wallet and 5 or more in my gear bag.
Plus there are plenty of books on this.
www.zxstudios.com
http://creativedragonstudios.smugmug.com
On a side note I've been confronted on a few occasions, one where the guy really was on edge. Staying calm and diffusing the situation is definitly the way to go. Funny they mentioned photos of cops... I once got pulled over for taking a photo of a cop going about a 100mph down the NJ turnpike! HAH! He just happened to see me and stabbed the brakes super trooper style and stopped me. He was like... who do you work for?
... I'm still peeling potatoes.
patti hinton photography
It has been my personal experiance that if you are photographing in a new geographical territory, ask to make a few photos of the local constabulary posing next to their patrol cars. Caveat: Don't catch them at the local donut shop, don't approach from the rear or with your hands in your pockets. And above all, don't inturrpt them if they have a motorist pulled over.
After making the photos, show up a day or two later with a few 8x10's from the local Walgreens and give them away. Make sure your business card is attached or info is written on the back. By doing this you have opened up a new line of opportunity for portrait shots, and in most cases have will have access to some emergency incidents. The same approach also works well with the fire service.
And for those of you thinking it - yes it is greasing the wheel, payola, a bribe, or any thing else you may want to label it.
"Never leave home without a camera"
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
I have taken photos of Firemen at fires and just posing beside their trucks with pretty girls. I have taken Policemen in action as well as with their crusers, canine units, swat teams, and with pretty girls. They love it just as you would. But just like anyone else, if they say NO.....they mean NO!
Does anyone know where the law stands pertaining to customs plazas when crossing the CDN / US border?
I ask that because I took a bunch of shots on the Port Huron bridge after I cleared customs at the Sarnia / Port Huron border. A customs officer came out, asked me what I was taking pictures of, and had me delete all the pictures of the plaza. I complied as I was just starting on a trip and had no desire to risk getting detained by the Customs security.
Was she in the wrong? Could I have told her it was a public place and I was going to keep my shots? Have any pros run into this, and if so - what did you do? (Yes, I know this is a public form, you're not a lawyer, consult appropriate legal counsel, etc.)
Unfortunately, my button is now pushed and the launch sequence has been initiated!
"Never leave home without a camera"
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/NYCFilmmakersGroup
http://www.meetup.com/NYC-Filmmakers-and-Actors-Meetup-Group/
I am not talking about photographers taking pictures of actors or government officials.
I am talking about underage kids...and there are some college age kids as well.
There is a fine line when taking pictures.
Attending a sporting event and posing as a sports photographer and taking pictures of rear ends, deck changing (with towels), buldges, adjusting oneself and posting onto internet sites and marketing these pictures to the gay community for a fee is not okay especially when many of the subjects are under 18.
Attending high school events using remote cameras is despictable.
A high school event is not a public event and entrance into the event may be prohibited.
Please take note that all parents are requested to sign a waiver in order for athletes' pictures to be published in newspapers throughout every school in California.
Many parents do not sign the waiver and some athlete's pictures are not allowed to be published.
Again, this is intended for a legamit publication vs a internet site that publishes pictures for sexual gratification.
How can someone take seriously a 44 year old man that goes on various sites and oogles pictures of young boys and makes comments that imply he is turned on by this.
"Oh, what a hottie" "What a nice tall glass of love" "I'd like to c-m in his ?" are some of the comments that one might find on these sites.
This 44 year old man posts comments and photos about these boys on various sites to excite his audience and bring them to his site for purposes of selling a membership to see pictures of young boys.
Talking a picture of an adult is one thing.
But these are supposed G rated pictures from a sports photographer and the photo isn't of the sport but rather the 'BULGE IN THE SPEEDO"
Even hair in the armpits is as much a thrill.
His market is strictly gay and pedophiles.
This photographer has begun receiving letters from Superintendents of School Districts and will receive more from National Sports Organizations that he is NOT ALLOWED ON DECK and requesting all pictures of the underage students be removed from his website.
Lawyers are being consulted.
Parents, Superintendents, Chairmen of various Sporting Organization, etc do not want this photographer taking pictures of their kids.
Take pictures of consenting adults who usually are paid for their services is one thing.
These boys do not participate nor are interested in getting paid do not know that they are presented in such a way on various sites.
And by the way, a legitamit photographer of sporting events sells photographs and gives back a percentage of his/her profits to the host of the sporting event.
A sports photographer that has to sneak into events, set up hidden cameras is not legitamit.
Actions speak louder than words.
This so called sports photographer has linked to this site and actually thinks he has rights to take pics of underage kids for the sole purpose of exploiting these underage kids for purposes of financial gain.
This photographer has a brother and two male friends that are involved in this venture.
As of this last week, one has to enter into a subscription with this website to view these pictures.
On the home page the so called sportsphotographer asked that the images not be redistributed and to respect the privacy of the persons pictured in the images.
It would be great if this sports photographer himself respected the privacy of the persons pictured in the images.
This sports photographer is so consumed with his rights to take pictures that he completely is oblivious of the rights of the persons pictured in the images.
He recently made a comment on one of the websites regarding his inability to take pictures "of the hotties" due to the fires on southern california.
I hope of have shed some light on this situation. Thank you.
The "so called" sports photographer is using BELphoto's initial post on this thread to justify the photos of the "young lads" as they are referred to on his so called sports photography website.
And if I didn't mention, the photos are usually of the boys standing, walking, getting out of the pool, deck changing, talking to their friends.
We have all heard of head shots, well this photographer specializes in butt shots and groin shots.
Thanks.
Sorry for my lengthy post.
Digital Grin has nothing to do with this so called photographer's photos of underage boy.
The so called photographer of underage boys is linking to this site to try to justify what he is doing...and it isn't working.
Thanks dgrin.
Unfortunately, it only takes a few like that to make life difficult for the overwhelming majority of us.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
As for the OP, good info and reassuring. I have previously taken comfort from a statement made by a cop on a UK show when a suspect objected to being filmed.. along the lines of "they can film anything they want in public." i.e. the fact that they were with the police wasn't relevant to their legal right to film.
Wedding Photographer Glasgow | Scotland
SWPP Pet Photographer of the Year 2010
Follow us on Facebook - Click Here
When I first published the Bert Krages II, Esq., article on Photographers Rights, and anytime I refer to or republish it, I also publish his DISCLAIMER. It is reprinted again for clarity in the space below.
Disclaimer
This is a general education guide about the right to take photographs and is necessarily limited in scope. For more information about the laws that affect photography, I refer you to my book, Legal Handbook for Photographers (Amherst Media, 2002).
This guide is not intended to be legal advice nor does it create an attorney client relationship. Readers should seek the advice of a competent attorney when they need legal advice regarding a specific situation.
Published by: Bert P. Krages II, Attorney at Law, 6665 S.W. Hampton Street, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97223; www.krages.com ; © 2003 Bert P. Krages II; krages@onemain.com
MY DISCLAIMER
I reprinted this article only as an interesting story, not as advice of any kind. I hope that this clears up any misconception that the article is the final word on photographer rights.
This article or subsequent threads or comments are not intended to be legal advice. Readers should seek the advice of a competent attorney when they need legal advice regarding a specific situation.
I take no responsibility whatsoever for anyone's convoluted interpretation of the article.
(I can't believe it's come to this.)
"Never leave home without a camera"
http://www.youtube.com/user/NYCFilmmakersGroup
http://www.meetup.com/NYC-Filmmakers-and-Actors-Meetup-Group/
"Never leave home without a camera"
I recently shot a pro tennis tournament and I know I have to place a credit on the photo for the organizer of the tournament. Once I have placed the copyright notice do I have any rights to the photos that I took?
Can I co-brand them?
What about selling prints?
The organizer mentioned the possibility of paying a small fee if I wanted to sell the pictures. Do you know what that fee might be?
Whatever the answer, it was fun to shoot remarkable athletes at the top of their form. I know that I can display the images.
SmugMug: www.randyjacksonimages.com
Email: randyjacksonimages@cox.net
Photography Blog: http://randyonphotography.com
What does your contract say?
1) Were you hired under a Work For Hire agreement by the Tournament? If so, they own the copyright to your photos
2) Did you sign a contract with the Tournament stating that you were selling them ( or giving them) the copyright to the photos you took? If so, they own the copyright
Otherwise, if you took the photos, you own the copyright, and you can sell them the photos, license usage to the for the photos, or sign over your copyright to them for the photos.
If you can post more info about your contract/agreement with them, it will be easier to answer your questions.
If you can post more info about your contract/agreement with them, it will be easier to answer your questions.[/quote]
No contract, one more lesson learned, but I still had a blast and learned a lot about sports photography.
Randy
SmugMug: www.randyjacksonimages.com
Email: randyjacksonimages@cox.net
Photography Blog: http://randyonphotography.com
Why? Is the organizer recommending you add your watermark?
You always have full copyright ownership of all your images unless YOU decide to relinquish those rights to another party.
you can but why would you?
Yes you can sell prints of any size to anyone, except to third party commercial entities intending to use the images commercially, unless you have releases to do so.
The organizer is asking for a commission to be paid to them for any prints you sell? Not unheard of; Probably for allowing you the opportunity to shoot their event. Your choice entirely. Start at 10% if you like.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
No contract, one more lesson learned, but I still had a blast and learned a lot about sports photography.
Randy[/QUOTE]
Let me rephrase, what kind of agreement did you make with him when he asked you to take the photos?
If you can explain your situation in a little more detail, people here can help you.
this thread has been dead for some time but i am going to revive it. i am new to this forum and i have alot to read but i am going to throw my questions out there in order to save time.
as i understand this...
i can go to a soccer tournament/horse show on public grounds and take pics of anyone i want. i can then post them on my website for purchase by parents and relatives. i can't resell them for commercial use unless i have model releases.
am i correct?
i am a soccer mom that has always loved photography and was retail portrait photographer for 5 years. i have done some trade work for friends(businesses) in the past. i have just purchased new gear and want to try to make some money with it(or at least pay for itself. my old gear died about 12 years ago and i have been settling for family shots with a crappy point and shoot. no more! i am far from a professional but people always comment on how they like my pictures.
If there is an OP, maybe he/she needs a second shooter!
Galleries here Upcoming Ranch/Horse Workshop
oh absolutely! i would never just walk in. as a parent i will always takes shots of my daughter's team but i would not solicite other teams.
i have contacted a few of the tournament photographers to see if they need additional shooters. i might as well do something in between her games. so what would someone charge say per game? they give me a card, i shoot and hand the card back.