Rights To Photograph In Public

by Nollind | January 24, 2008 at 03:06 pm | 427 views | 7 comments

While walking along West Broadway this morning, I noticed what appeared to be an old fashioned mixer sitting on the sidewalk outside of a Greek bakery near the corner of West Broadway and Blenheim. Marvelling at it's design and construction, I decide to take some photographs of it with my digital camera. After taking a full body shot of it and as I was preparing to take a second more closeup shot, I was interrupted from behind by a large business man who indicated that he didn't want me taking a picture of it. He stated that there was a problem with the machine, some people were coming to look at it shortly, and they didn't want anyone photographing it (his business partner was inside the bakery).

Instead of indicating the obvious absurdity to him, that the machine was sitting in plain view on a public street with no cloth covering it whatsoever, for anyone to see, I instead just informed him that it wasn't a problem. However I also informed him I wouldn't be patronizing their bakery anymore. In effect, what started out to be a simple admiration for a piece of well designed machinery turned into an incident that left a bad taste in my mouth.

No matter who this person was or what they said, I had the right to photograph this machinery on the street because it was in a public location and in plain view. If they were smart, they would have just let me photograph it and be on my way. But by explicitly asking me not to photograph it, they drew attention to something they obviously did not want noticed. What I have no idea. Yet because of their actions, I now feel it necessary to ensure this photograph is released to the public, if only to exercise my public rights in relaying it.

Flag this story

Upload

Make your good story a great story. Click here to add your photos & video to this story.

Crowd Power

Scan the web to add photos and videos to this story or add them from the NowPublic Archive.

jordan

at 15:33 on January 24th, 2008

good stuff:

I like your style. Indeed you are correct: public streets are fair game for photography. As you describe it, there was nothing illegal in what you did; sure, they could ask you not to photograph their whatever-it-is, but you are well within your rights to say no.

Martha Jones

at 15:32 on January 24th, 2008

As an amateur photographer I agree that you should be able to take photos without being hassled, so long as you're not violating anyone's privacy. I guess the difficulty is that the proliferation of technology - digital cameras, camera phones etc - has progressed faster than people's attitudes towards it.

Rob Walker

at 15:34 on January 24th, 2008

good stuff:

It's funny how, as you said, it wasn't really a news story until someone asked you not to photograph it.

Most security guards, business owners and police are completely ignorant as to photographer's rights.

kate

at 15:47 on January 24th, 2008

I totally agree. And it's very cool looking!

infomatique

at 17:28 on January 24th, 2008

good stuff:

Nollind, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Unfortunately this is one of my pet topics at present.
Even here in Ireland people are frequently trying to enforce rights that they do not have. I now encounter this exact same problem here in Dublin at least once per week. One really silly incident occurred when a small wedding dress shop owner claimed that her window was "copyrighted". (note: the shop was small, not the wedding dresses :>)). I have sought advice from both the legal profession and the police and all were surprised that I was having this problem.

I am tempted to point out that the majority of shops now have security cameras outside their premises and they never ask for my permission to video me as I walk down the street.

Of course I also have the opposite problem with people insisting on being in my photographs, but that's another discussion.

Thanks for highlighting this problem.

matte

at 18:00 on January 24th, 2008

I think in the case of the shop window this is slightly different - it could be construed as a creative, that is like an artwork with 'performance ights' assigned to it.

There is that case of the tree on the headland in California that was so very popular with photographers, but this was stopped at the tree's owner claimed copyright over the visual image it created

Swan

at 18:03 on January 24th, 2008

good stuff:

Hello Nollind,

I really enjoyed this story. Absolutely original, while informing the public of our rights to photograph anything in plain sight. People, if you don't want to draw attention to something - don't leave it in public!

Good job!
~ Swan