Well, it happened to me; Bugged by security.

[RMThompson]

Whoa, whoa whoa!

I never said the mall doesn't have the right to tell me to stop! Of course they do! I never ONCE claimed the mall is public property, it's not! It's PRIVATE PROPERTY that has public access.

There are parts of the mall I, or you, aren't allowed in, store backrooms for example. I would never pretend that this is public property and that we should all be able to do what we want.

Nor do I doubt the right of the security guard to tell me to stop takings pictures... she had the right, and I complied. The law states I can take pictures in a mall, since it's considered public SPACE. However the land is still owned by someone and they have the right to tell me to stop, and they did.

My beef is with the REASONING behind it. We weren't hurting anyone, we weren't endangering anyone, and with being on the roof - we weren't even impeding any transactions or distracting customers from the wares of the stores.

It's just another case of over security... that's all.

 

[usayit]

oh yeh... just remember..

Even though it is private property, they do not have the right to confescate equipment that is your property. This includes rolls of film.


Just out of curiosity...

Where you shooting with an SLR or point&shoot???


I've been "bugged" by security many times... almost always with an "big" flashy SLR. P&S or my rangefinder.. rarely.

 

[Battou]

It's just another case of over security... that's all.

Actually, if you where in a restricted aria that is not the case at all. She was there to have you remove yourself from the restricted aria, that is a part of her job description. I doubt her original intent was oriented around your photographing, I imagine it branched into it with your stated intrest in continuing your work in said restricted aria. This is likely why you where asked to leave the premisis as you would be unable to gain the permit to shoot in that location. This is a case of better safe than sorry on the part of the security guard. She was likely under the assumption you would return the moment she turned her back.

 

[RMThompson]

oh yeh... just remember..

Even though it is private property, they do not have the right to confescate equipment that is your property. This includes rolls of film.


Just out of curiosity...

Where you shooting with an SLR or point&shoot???


I've been "bugged" by security many times... almost always with an "big" flashy SLR. P&S or my rangefinder.. rarely.

Nikon D50, with 50mm lens and an SB-800 flash.

 

[Battou]

oh yeh... just remember..

Even though it is private property, they do not have the right to confescate equipment that is your property. This includes rolls of film.


Just out of curiosity...

Where you shooting with an SLR or point&shoot???


I've been "bugged" by security many times... almost always with an "big" flashy SLR. P&S or my rangefinder.. rarely.

it should be the other way around, the big flashy SLRs should be an indicator that one knows what they are doing wile the point and shoot more indicating unprofesional.

 

[abraxas]

...
All in all, it wasn't that bad, but I just wanted to ask... "WHO am I hurting by taking pics"? ...

...
Ridiculous.

I'd think you could get your question answered by calling the mall office and see what it takes to set up a casual shoot like that.

 

[usayit]

it should be the other way around, the big flashy SLRs should be an indicator that one knows what they are doing wile the point and shoot more indicating unprofesional.

Thats my point...


P&S = non-professional which most business owners do not feel threatened by... so many people carry them just for personal snapping of family and friends. The is the same for camera phones. I'm still there to do business and shop... I just happen to snap a few photos of my son running around.

SLRs = professional which means they are intruding in your place of business. These are people who are not there to shop. They are their for their own profiting. They will take action and/or ask for you to formally request permission.

This is the same for people... If I'm at the playground with a small camera (with my son), no one takes notice. If I'm at that same playground with my 1D MII and a 70-200 f2.8L WHITE big lens attached, parents start treating me like I'm a perverted child molester.



My rangefinders almost always are mistaken for just plain jane P&S. I've had 6 lenses, 2 rangefinder in a shoulder bag that looks like a regular messenger bag... no problems. I've had 1 SLR and 1 zoom... been asked to leave.

 

[schumionbike]

Yes, in my example, that can be done on any privately-owned property, whether it's open to the public or not.

Owners of private property that is open to the public can discriminate for any reason whatever (except fopr those reasons forbidden by law). Race discrimination is, again, a bad example because it's specifically identified in law as illegal in any facility open to the public.

I'm just trying to make show how some privately owned facilitity could be subject to public law such as race discrimination. The fact that race discrimination is specifically identified in law as illegal isn't relavance, it's still a public law that is apply to privately own property such as a mall due to public policy reason. The same public policy does not hold as much weight when it come privately own homes.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

Also, as crazy as it sounds, many store owners or managers are paranoid about having their window displays photographed. They are worried about the competition.

Anyone can walk into a mall with a camera and take photos. However, if asked not to take photos by a security person, then you must stop. If you continue to shoot and the guard tells you to either stop or leave the mall, then you have to comply. If you keep shooting, at that point, you are trespassing.

As mentioned before, it is usually the guys with the DSLR's and such that get bothered. If you show up with a P&S, or what appears to be a P&S, most of the time, you never get a second glance from anyone.

 

[RMThompson]

Actually, if you where in a restricted aria that is not the case at all. She was there to have you remove yourself from the restricted aria, that is a part of her job description. I doubt her original intent was oriented around your photographing, I imagine it branched into it with your stated intrest in continuing your work in said restricted aria. This is likely why you where asked to leave the premisis as you would be unable to gain the permit to shoot in that location. This is a case of better safe than sorry on the part of the security guard. She was likely under the assumption you would return the moment she turned her back.

A parking lot is not a restricted area. I never entered a restricted area, just the parking lot, and the stairwell that customers use to go to the lower parking areas.

 

[Battou]

It's my understanding you where in a parking structure.

Was this a parking lot or a parking structure?

A parking Structure is considerably different than a parking lot in the fact it is a structure. Any structure and or section of a structure can be deemed as a restricted aria and enforced, usually for saftey reasons. Restricted arias do not meen that people can not go there, but mearly must have a reason to be in the aria with in a certain set context unless otherwise permitted. Parking sturctures are almost always classified as restricted arias, restricted to motorists using the facility and pedestrians in transit to/from their vehicle to/form the ajoined facility, pedestrians often are not permitted to freely roam about the facility.

By stopping to take a picture, you in essence became a roaming pedestrian.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for the rights of photographers, but I look at both sides of the equation and yes this is a liability thing.

To put a blunt answer to the question you posted in the original post: No one, however the security staff are not going to let you do something where you, your model, or company property at risk. This is their job wether you are a patron or not.

You want to shoot there, call the office get the permit....then rub it in her face if you want, but the one fact remains they where well within their right to request you to leave at that time. You did the right thing by complying to that request.

Truth is what happened to you should be a near perfect example of how to deal with the situation...the only exceptions being the final plea and the return trip to shot near the car, but any who.

 

[skieur]

I could be wrong, but isn't a mall and it's parking lot considered a public place? At least during business hours?

Boy, I am glad someone knows their law. YES, a mall and parking lot are considered a public place. If that were not the case, most regular laws would not apply.

Yes, you can legally take photos in a public place such as a mall or parking lot but if the owner or his representative tell you that you are trespassing, then you have to leave.

skieur

 

[Socrates]

Boy, I am glad someone knows their law. YES, a mall and parking lot are considered a public place. If that were not the case, most regular laws would not apply.

Malls and parking lots are not public places. They are private places open to the public.

I'm uncertain what you mean by "regular laws." In all states in the U.S. that I'm aware, you can not get a ticket for running a stop sign in a parking lot but you can get arrested for drunk driving. As far as law enforcement is concerned, it's not any different from your own property. Misdemeanors can not be enforced but felonies (called "high misdemeanors in some states) can be enforced.

The only other distinction is related specifically to "private property open to the public," such as malls, stores, restaurants, etc. The governing bodies have the authority to write and enforce "public safety" laws, such as related to discrimination, food safety, handicap access, etc. (Yeah, some of those laws are a stretch.)

In the absence of any specific law to the contrary, the owner of the property has the same rights as the owner of a private home.

 

[JerryPH]

RM, I would have loved to hear that you did a little homework and got written permission to do a casual shoot in there and that you flabbergasted that guard.

As it turned out, your taking shots there was a bad move and caused you a little grief.

Thats ok, no harm done and you did end up being a gentleman about it, though you were playing with her head a bit with the shopping questions... lol

 

[RMThompson]

RM, I would have loved to hear that you did a little homework and got written permission to do a casual shoot in there and that you flabbergasted that guard.

As it turned out, your taking shots there was a bad move and caused you a little grief.

Thats ok, no harm done and you did end up being a gentleman about it, though you were playing with her head a bit with the shopping questions... lol

I wish I would've too, but the fact is that no one will ever grant this permission... they have no reason too!

Taking the shots wasn't a bad move though! I got the shots I needed, and there was no harm, no foul. I can use any of the pictures I want, so it wasn't a waste.

I did tease her a bit about shopping, because she was more adamant about stopping me from taking pictures. I feel like I could've argued my way back to shopping, but hey, I was on the job!