Photographers rights....

[JenLavazza]

I found this article and thought it was interesting, so I wanted to share it.

Bert P. Krages Attorney at Law Photographer's Rights Page

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Very good link. It should interest a lot of members. I've bookmarked it myself.

And since we have members from all over the world, I'd like to point out that this person is looking for legal handbooks for photographers from various countries to add to his list of links.

 

[Phranquey]

This gets rediscovered every so often. I keep a copy of it in my camera bag....:thumbup:

 

[Harris]

I have a question regarding photographers rights - I don't mean to hijack this thread, so if this offends the OP, I will move it.

I recently went to a concert (here in TX), and they confiscated my camera(and all gear) at the front door, they said it was because it had detachable a lens; yet allowed P & S cameras? Although I was upset I gave up my bag, and went into the venue. When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

So here's my question, do venues have the right to discriminate as to what type of cameras they allow in?

 

[Plato]

I have a question regarding photographers rights - I don't mean to hijack this thread, so if this offends the OP, I will move it.

I recently went to a concert (here in TX), and they confiscated my camera(and all gear) at the front door, they said it was because it had detachable a lens; yet allowed P & S cameras? Although I was upset I gave up my bag, and went into the venue. When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

So here's my question, do venues have the right to discriminate as to what type of cameras they allow in?

I am not a lawyer and my opinion is merely that of a citizen of the United States of America. I think that you got screwed royally and I think that you inadvertently let them do it.

 

[table1349]

I have a question regarding photographers rights - I don't mean to hijack this thread, so if this offends the OP, I will move it.

I recently went to a concert (here in TX), and they confiscated my camera(and all gear) at the front door, they said it was because it had detachable a lens; yet allowed P & S cameras? Although I was upset I gave up my bag, and went into the venue. When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

So here's my question, do venues have the right to discriminate as to what type of cameras they allow in?

Of course they do. It's private property. You bought a ticket to see a show.

Look at this way, do you have the right to decide what someone does or does not bring into your home?

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I have a question regarding photographers rights - I don't mean to hijack this thread, so if this offends the OP, I will move it.

I recently went to a concert (here in TX), and they confiscated my camera(and all gear) at the front door, they said it was because it had detachable a lens; yet allowed P & S cameras? Although I was upset I gave up my bag, and went into the venue. When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

So here's my question, do venues have the right to discriminate as to what type of cameras they allow in?

Actually, I have serious doubt that this would be allowed to go on if someone would challenge it in court. But (isn't there always one of those?) who is going to spend their money on this challenge? Keeping in mind that this probably has the potential to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

[table1349]

I have a question regarding photographers rights - I don't mean to hijack this thread, so if this offends the OP, I will move it.

I recently went to a concert (here in TX), and they confiscated my camera(and all gear) at the front door, they said it was because it had detachable a lens; yet allowed P & S cameras? Although I was upset I gave up my bag, and went into the venue. When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

So here's my question, do venues have the right to discriminate as to what type of cameras they allow in?

Actually, I have serious doubt that this would be allowed to go on if someone would challenge it in court. But (isn't there always one of those?) who is going to spend their money on this challenge? Keeping in mind that this probably has the potential to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

This kind of thing has gone to the courts. It is a simple matter.

It is PRIVATE PROPERTY. The venue has the right to allow or not allow photographic, video and audio recording devices or to designate what types they will and will not allow. The poster had the choice of getting out of line and taking his gear back to the vehicle.

Because you plunk down money to go see a performance does not give you the right to expect anything more that watching that performance. That is all your money bought you unless otherwise specified.

 

[musicaleCA]

One would think that they would at least have to inform you at the time of purchase that you aren't allowed to bring in an SLR camera. As for actually confiscating your own property, I highly doubt that's allowable; saying you can't use it, sure, but not taking possession of it themselves. Only the police have that ability, and only when there's sufficient reason to do so (e.g. arrest). I know, for an absolute fact, that no one has the right to confiscate your property (regardless that you are on their property or not) here in Canada. (What they can do is refuse you entry, but if they didn't tell you that you wouldn't be allowed to bring an SLR at the time of purchase, it's essentially an a posteriori change to their agreement to provide access to the concert for a certain fee, in which case you have every right to demand a full refund.)

 

[thekyle]

interesting read. reminded me of the time i had to delete all my pictures that i took at a concert at the tweeter center. they had signs saying "no professional photography", i guess that means any camera with a detachable lens.

those were some of my best shots that i've taken too :C

 

[musicaleCA]

interesting read. reminded me of the time i had to delete all my pictures that i took at a concert at the tweeter center. they had signs saying "no professional photography", i guess that means any camera with a detachable lens.

those were some of my best shots that i've taken too :C

NEVER delete your images. (Unless you've somehow taken pictures of a military base and are a breath away from being arrested for treason, and the cop is being nice and willing to let you go if you delete the images, never, ever, ever let anyone tell you to delete your images.) They don't have that right, as the images are your own property. They can eject you from the area and re-entering thereafter would be trespassing, but under no circumstances can anyone force you to destroy your property. Nor can they do so with implied use of force (that constitutes assault in Canada under the Criminal Code; US laws may vary from state to state—edit: come to think of it, forcing you to destroy your images constitutes assault on one's property, whereas using implied or actual force is assault on one's person).

 

[Plato]

One would think that they would at least have to inform you at the time of purchase that you aren't allowed to bring in an SLR camera. As for actually confiscating your own property, I highly doubt that's allowable; saying you can't use it, sure, but not taking possession of it themselves. Only the police have that ability, and only when there's sufficient reason to do so (e.g. arrest). I know, for an absolute fact, that no one has the right to confiscate your property (regardless that you are on their property or not) here in Canada. (What they can do is refuse you entry, but if they didn't tell you that you wouldn't be allowed to bring an SLR at the time of purchase, it's essentially an a posteriori change to their agreement to provide access to the concert for a certain fee, in which case you have every right to demand a full refund.)

This reminds me of software packages with restricted use verbiage that you don't see until you've opened the package and are no longer able to obtain a refund.

 

[dhilberg]

As mentioned, private venues can allow or disallow photographic equipment if they want, or pick and choose what types to allow in. What they can't do is confiscate your equipment against your will, or force you to hand over your film or memory cards. That's called theft. You also don't have to delete any images. Although to diffuse a situation it may be the best thing, and you can just use recovery software to later restore them.

This is all covered in the Photographer's Right link above, which I also keep a copy of in my camera bag. :thumbup:

 

[Phranquey]

I recently went to a concert (here in TX), and they confiscated my camera(and all gear) at the front door, they said it was because it had detachable a lens; yet allowed P & S cameras? Although I was upset I gave up my bag, and went into the venue. When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

Gryphonslair99 is absolutely correct. This was a private event that you were entering, and they have every right to regulate whatever they want coming in. They might have had the point of veiw that someone with a P&S is a fan taking pictures, whereas someone with an SLR might be a Pro looking to make money.....their decision & descretion.

And to clarify your own statement.....They did not confiscate your bag, you willingly gave it up in order to enter the event. You could have just as easily taken it back to your car, dropped it off, and went back in.

 

[Sodak]

When I came out I got even more pissed because when I was signing out my gear I found they had a detailed list of what was in my sealed bag?

I don't think they were being nosy, I think they did it to protect themselves from you. You gave them the bag to hold for you, and what would keep a person from coming back to get there bag and saying "Hey, there were 3 L-series lenses in here when I gave you the bag, someone here stole them. This place owes me $3000"

Not saying you would do it, but there are people out there who would.