I was just told to leave or police would be called

[skieur]

not sure on that one - although if the sign is in clear view then chances are even if you can't request deletion getting the police and a warrent to have the photos deleted would not be a problem.

Sure it would. You can't be arrested for taking photos and photos are the property of the photographer so even the police cannot delete photos.

skieur

 

[maxalmon]

You guys have been very informative...

Not sure if this is a Vegas only law > I owned several retails stores and one of retail centers was having some serious gang/loitering problems, finally had the police out for a landlord/tenenat meeting on what to do. We were told specifically that you had to have a sign clearly posted that "trespassers would prosecuted" otherwise all the police could do is escort or make the people leave the property but they could not be prosecuted. But, once the police were called and the persons name was documented and they came back onto the property, they could then be prosecuted because they had been prior warned.

I'm still going to call the paper today and see if they find it interesting enough to do a story. It's a very cool area, outdoor sculptures, interesting architecture....."The Districts" is a very famous area on this side of town, everybody knows about, where it's at etc...

 

[hankejp]

You're not a real photographer until you've been thrown out of somewhere for taking photographs. :mrgreen:

I was once admonished for taking photographs from the pit wall at Silverstone race track. I was also told to leave a station on the Docklands Light Railway in London, they don't allow photography there, fortunately I managed to get some good shots before I was thrown out on both occasions.

DAMNIT...Another thing to add to my list to become a "real" photographer. :lmao:

 

[Overread]

Sure it would. You can't be arrested for taking photos and photos are the property of the photographer so even the police cannot delete photos.

skieur

even if (as in the example I was answering) there was a policy on private land and suitable visual notification that photography was not allowed? Whilst the photos are the property of the photographer it would be argued that they were obtained without permission and thus are illegal. Might take time, but I can't see how the photographer would win in this case - granted the police have to get the warrent before they can force you to delete

 

[Overread]

I'm still going to call the paper today and see if they find it interesting enough to do a story. It's a very cool area, outdoor sculptures, interesting architecture....."The Districts" is a very famous area on this side of town, everybody knows about, where it's at etc...

before you get to paper stage have you tried contacting the owners of the mall; not reception you just get stock answers there - but an actual manager? Whilst the grunt on the floor (security guard) is just a monkey with not choice the managers might be willing to let you photograph if you make a good and honest case.

 

[epp_b]

Taking photos, video or audio recording of any store, product, employee, cutomer or officer. While taking photos of a shopping party with shopping center de`cor as a backdrop is allowed, all other activities must have shopping center management approval"

You should have told him that you didn't see "pigeons" on that list.

 

[superemone]

I was just wandering around the block with my camera when I saw a pretty flower on my neighbor's front yard. So I couldn't help myself but snap a few pictures. I was after my 3rd shot when I got kicked out. I know it's private property and all, but can I guy just enjoy nature through his camera in peace!

 

[epp_b]

I walked onto an old dumpy lot in town a little while ago to take a few pictures. I was fully expecting that it was abandoned and that no one lived there. Suddenly, this guy who looks like he was a long-lost member of ZZ Top opens the door. Nothing was said, I just turned around, left and didn't look back.

I got a great picture out of it, though:



(would you have thought that someone actually lived there?!)

 

[maxalmon]

Ye Ha Bubba, we got aurselves some live target practasssing shootin at, he's moving fast....

 

[maxalmon]

I particularly enjoy the vodka bottle and carton of eggs in the bottom right side.

 

[Synnove]

I was taking photos for a real estate company last year and they wanted me to include photos of the local mall. I snapped some photos and then was accosted by the security guard and told to leave the property. I didn't have to delete my photos but I did have to leave immediately. Luckily, I got the shots I needed for the client before I got kicked out. They said I would have to have written permission from the mall office to photograph there.

 

[ANDS!]

"Rent-A-Cop". The guy no doubts earns a fair wage, and has a permanent posting through the agency that contracts out his services. Maybe if you folks were a little more respectful and non-argumentative you'd get more mileage out of these "rent-a-cops".

As for the OP, really nothing you can do sadly.

 

[maxalmon]

ME=OP Yes there is, I can turn this into a total marketing nightmare. local paper (only 1) and several of the radio stations are interested....
"snapshot - don't got to the districts if you want to take photos, they throw you out or will have you arrested" Gota love that kinda free publicity, shop keepers have also been informed as to this and they are PISSED

There is absuoltley no reason for this and it's pure stupidty

 

[Overread]

Remember max - whilst your defending your rights to shoot they are also just defending their own rights to not let people shoot.
honestly good luck, but might it not have been better to take a less antagonistic approach first?

 

[greyhoundman]

And I'd be careful of how you go about your campaign.
Large corps like them have won a number of suits against folks for damage to their reps.
I don't know of any mall or other private shopping area that allows folks to freely take photos on their property.