confiscation

[Joxby]

Its not about restrictions, its not about what individual companys decide what can or can't ,when, why, what be shot on their premises, the photos are taken/end...now what ?
He cannot personally or proffessionaly confiscate your property whatever rules and regulations apply, whatever is written in a contract that you signed, it doesn't matter, he is a Joe on the street just like you and me.
It is not a ciminal offence to photograph any part of your place of work, and even if it was, he still can't take your stuff, but he will if you give it to him.
The fact he is effectively your employer complicates things, I'm sure pressure was applied with regard to your continued employment, but its still your choice.

 

[mapgirl]

bolter,

What's actually great about this experience is that it probably gave your class a perfect object lesson in a photographer's rights and responsibilities. They'd have a lot to discuss in terms of law and social/cultural practicalities. Frankly, your teacher couldn't have asked for a better situation. Real life events work better in the classroom than theoretical ones.

 

[oldnavy170]

Well, I'm not going to start bluring out all of the trademarked crap that finds its way into the background of my photos, and I'm pretty sure those one hour photo labs aren't going to do it either. I also doubt that companies are going to start suing people who have such things in their photos.

I would have told the manager to go pi$$ up a rope.

Understandable but its not the photo lab that took his photos its Target that took his photos of employees wearing their uniforms. He was also taking those photos at the Target store.

Anyways, thats just my thoughts take it for what its worth.

 

[fotogenik]

Private Property, plain and simple. Any store has the right to disallow photography on their premises. The fact that you were an employee simply gives them another arm to twist.

Yes they have the right to confiscate the photo's and if you do not give them up it is well within their powers to summon the local authorities and have you locked up for criminal trespass (I am sure that the charge has another fancy name, but thats basically what it is)

Cheers,

 

[TheOtherBob]

Private Property, plain and simple. Any store has the right to disallow photography on their premises. The fact that you were an employee simply gives them another arm to twist.

That's right - and the reason they can confiscate the photos is that they can twist that arm. As a legal matter, you don't have to give them the pictures. But as an employment matter, they don't have to continue employing you -- so it comes down to whether this is a sufficient intrusion on your personal rights to risk getting fired. Honestly, for me it would be, because who wants to work for a pr**k who steals your stuff?

Yes they have the right to confiscate the photo's and if you do not give them up it is well within their powers to summon the local authorities and have you locked up for criminal trespass (I am sure that the charge has another fancy name, but thats basically what it is)

Sorry, but that part's flat wrong. They can prohibit taking pictures while on the premises, and they can ask you to leave. But if you're on the premises with their permission (as he was), and take pictures without being told not to (as he did)...you haven't trespassed (criminally or otherwise). They can then ask you to leave the premises because they don't like that you've taken the pictures. If you refuse, you may be trespassing, and depending on local laws such trespass may or may not be criminal rather than civil. However, the photos you've taken remain your personal property -- they didn't become the property of the store by virtue of being taken there. (Property owners don't, by virtue of such ownership, hold intellectual property over images of that property). The store's one and only recourse is to ask you to leave, and your only potential crime would be to refuse.

 

[pandinus]

A general rule of thumb would be: If the area photograped is accessable to the general public, it is a public area. (Private property or no.)

However, if the person/corporation who own the area that person/corporation has the right to give restrictions. (Company bylaws etc.)

Lets just put it this way.

I can not for the life of me understand Target, Wallmart or what ever not allowing an employee to photograph at work.

When companies like Pratt & Whitney (for whom I work by the way) have no problem with it... (Well, as long as I respect the restrictions they give that is.) If my manager tells me not to photograph something, I respect that. (People not wanting to be photographed etc.)

Keep an open dialogue with your superiors about this. Work is about 1/3 of your life, and you should enjoy 100% of your life. If one is not able to do that, then it may be a problem in the long run....