Question on rights

[skieur]

Not bad... Have you done this before? Is that how you know all abou this?

Well, when you are involved in all the media: photography, television,audio, scripting, graphics, and public presentations, you tend to get into or run the risk of getting into all kinds of legal situations. You also learn a great deal from working with lawyers. They are worth what they are paid if you go after the best. One does not expect to pay a lawyer a 6 figure fee but if you come out on the financial plus side, then it is well worth it.

skieur

 

[patrickt]

I will agree it is always better to get legal advice from a lawyer.

 

[skieur]

I will agree it is always better to get legal advice from a lawyer.

Of course, but the problem for many is that the legal advice is only as good as the expertise and experience of the lawyer in the particular area.
I have found that there is a wide range and I have been told by lawyers that the challenge is to find a lawyer that has a reputation among his/her peers as a "major player" and that takes some research and connections.

skieur

 

[patrickt]

Just for the record, theft in most jurisdictions is the taking of property with the intent of permanently depriving the owner of his property. Possession of stolen property is charged when the person with the property did not steal it but knew it was stolen.

After you've thrown a temper tantrum, hired an attorney, called the politicians, vented your spleen on the internet, then you sit down and say, "Was the picture from the parking lot worth it?"

I have known many news photographers and video folks. Most never had a significant problem. I remember one who constantly had problems. The variable was the person.

 

[Big Bully]

Of course, but the problem for many is that the legal advice is only as good as the expertise and experience of the lawyer in the particular area.
I have found that there is a wide range and I have been told by lawyers that the challenge is to find a lawyer that has a reputation among his/her peers as a "major player" and that takes some research and connections.

skieur

But it is also finding that lawyer and getting them to take the time to listen to you. I had issues with some lawyers that were playing dirty and we went to talk to the "major player" in town, and she brushed us off.. So even if you have a convincing problem, you have to be able to convince them to give you more than just the time of day.

 

[skieur]

Just for the record, theft in most jurisdictions is the taking of property with the intent of permanently depriving the owner of his property. Possession of stolen property is charged when the person with the property did not steal it but knew it was stolen.

After you've thrown a temper tantrum, hired an attorney, called the politicians, vented your spleen on the internet, then you sit down and say, "Was the picture from the parking lot worth it?"

I have known many news photographers and video folks. Most never had a significant problem. I remember one who constantly had problems. The variable was the person.

Just for the record, you need to go past one web site when you are doing research. "theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely given consent." You will find that all over the place as the generally accepted legal definition. Possession of stolen property because the individual who took the equipment likely turned it in to a security office for example and any security firm should legally know that they do not have the right to hold on to or confiscate property. That requires police, an arrest usually, and a warrant.

I did not suggest anyone throw a temper tantrum, quite the contrary you use what hopefully you have lots of which I hope is brains and the ability to put together an inexpensive strategy to get what you want. Anyone who has read the paper has noticed that politics and the media can be used to bring an issue to the attention of the public and perhaps more importantly to the attention of those organizations, publications and politicians that see individual rights as important. An election year would actually be the ideal time to bring a rights issue to the attention of the public.

The issue is not whether the picture was worth it. The issue is whether you casually accept the violation of your rights because of the agenda of an organization or the ignorance of security firms and whether with limited or no cost, you can get financial compensation for being treated like a criminal.

skieur

 

[skieur]

I have known many news photographers and video folks. Most never had a significant problem. I remember one who constantly had problems. The variable was the person.

Well, as you go up the food chain so-to-speak, there is a lot more aggression, competition, back stabbing, and larger egos. The law is frequently used to bash those seen as "competitors" for positions, assignments, and more visibility career wise within an organization.

In terms of external work, going into volatile, emotional, hot situations means sometime someone will want to try and burn you. In several decades it has happened only a few times, but I have always won.

skieur

 

[patrickt]

No, the only place to get an appropriate definition of theft is in your state statutes. And most of them will have a statement of intent. Your state statute might be online but there are plenty of general definitions on legal sites.
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=2119&bold=||||

If you're at a party and someone picks up your camera without your permission, that isn't theft. There is no intent to deny you your camera. On the other hand, if someone picks it up and puts it in their purse, that's a different matter.

In Colorado, where I lived, the state statute is as stated above. But, clearly the intent issue is critical.

 

[chrisgrieve]

hi, just thought i would add this link to a petition about photography laws, was sent it in an email, unfortunately its for UK residents only, and it probably wont make much of a difference but hey if enough sign it maybe someone will take notice.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/photographylaw/

 

[skieur]

hi, just thought i would add this link to a petition about photography laws, was sent it in an email, unfortunately its for UK residents only, and it probably wont make much of a difference but hey if enough sign it maybe someone will take notice.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/photographylaw/

It is the judiciary that interprets and applies the laws in the U.K. and elsewhere, so the government cannot clarify anything. They make the laws period.

The petition should have been sent to the UK equivalent of the Attorney General.

skieur

 

[skieur]

No, the only place to get an appropriate definition of theft is in your state statutes. And most of them will have a statement of intent. Your state statute might be online but there are plenty of general definitions on legal sites.
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=2119&bold=||||

If you're at a party and someone picks up your camera without your permission, that isn't theft. There is no intent to deny you your camera. On the other hand, if someone picks it up and puts it in their purse, that's a different matter.

In Colorado, where I lived, the state statute is as stated above. But, clearly the intent issue is critical.

If intent is in any state laws, it only covers situations where for example something valuable as been noticed in an unsafe location and has been moved to a safer location waiting for the owner to claim it. It may also cover situations for example where someone wrongly assumed that they had permission to borrow a neighbours ladder for example, but had every intention of returning it immediately after use. These kinds of misunderstandings should not lead to theft charges.

However, this is not the situation if for example camera equipment has been seized or involuntarily handed over to security and no one will tell you where it is, when or whether it will ever be returned. Depriving someone of their property when no charges have been laid is ILLEGAL..pure simple and basic.

skieur

 

[am_photoer]

What if you own stock in a company your shooting at!

Like if you have stock in wal-mart (publically traded company) you therefore own a small part of the company. It may be private property but if wal-mart owns it then in fact you own it.