What a joke!

[danalec99]

NYC to seek Permit and Insurance to take pictures on city property, including sidewalks. This applies to tourists, amateur photographers and wannabe film- makers hoping to make it big on YouTube. It would be interesting to see how they are planning to enforce this law. What will they do with the millions of tourists? Confiscate cameras from JFK?
I hope this silliness will fade away like the MTA Subway photo ban they unsuccessfully tried a while ago - digg it

nyt article

 

[mysteryscribe]

I wonder if taking pictures is covered under the 1st amendment. Does anybody know if that was ever tried as defense for shooting pictures.

 

[usayit]

What in the h3ll is this country coming to???? At least in the North Jersey/NYC area it feels like a police state is being formed.....

After our governor was in a car accident without a seatbelt.. what did they do? Go out and setup street check points handing out seatbelt tickets...

sheeesh...


I do believe photography does fall under the 1st amendment...

 

[crownlaurel]

What bothered me was the fact that they held a public hearing and NO ONE showed up, so either no one who pays taxes there cares a flip or they didn't let people know.

 

[skieur]

I wonder if taking pictures is covered under the 1st amendment. Does anybody know if that was ever tried as defense for shooting pictures.

It is generally accepted under the 1st amendment as well as under laws governing the freedom of the press which tend to cover most democracies through treaties and world wide press associations.

In one american case that was written up, a judge in ruling in favour of the photographer criticized the police and the prosecutor for their lack of knowledge of the law related to the right to take photos in a public place.

skieur

 

[Alex_B]

what the heck ...

 

[highwoodhiker]

NYC to seek Permit and Insurance to take pictures on city property, including sidewalks.

Only within certain limits you failed to mention.

This applies to tourists, amateur photographers and wannabe film- makers hoping to make it big on YouTube.

No it doesn't. This was an assumption made by the article writer.
You only need a permit and insurance if you are in a group of two or more people and taking photos in the same location for more than half an hour. Tripod use requires a permit and insurance if you are in a group of 5 or more people and will be shooting in the same location for more than 10 minutes.
The law mostly affects professionals who act like they own the sidewalk or the area they are shooting in and expect everyone to stay out of the way or walk around till they are done.
It doesn't affect amateur photographers or tourists at all unless they are spending more than half an hour in one particular spot taking photos(who does this on city streets?)and is being blown out of proportion on every photography forum I have seen. It is a restriction that is being applied to the people who are causing the need for restriction. The rest of us can just ignore it.

 

[danalec99]

That would make sense, but professional filmmakers already need permit/insurance to shoot in NYC. That's not news.

The assumption that the writer is making is how this is going to be enforced due to the language being 'vague'. A tourist group of 10 will be spending more than 10 minutes at, say the 9/11 spot.

 

[Garbz]

These laws would be bearly enforceable even to professionals. There was a case where in Sydney they tried to ban photography without a permit on Bondai beach. Everyone who got handed a fine kindly reminded the council that their right to photograph in a public place is protected by a federal precedent and can not be overruled by a local council.

It's interesting to see such attacks on photography in the modern world. Basically I think if someone falls over my tripod and breaks their neck tough luck, natural selection, and at least there's one less idiot in the world. That said I don't exactly use up the entire sidewalk when I setup my camera either.

 

[rmh159]

mmmm gotta love the fear mongering.

First off, don't believe everything you read.

Secondly. people are ****ed about a law requiring a seatbelt?. Would people complain too if they outlawed banging your head against a wall? At least have some compassion for the people that scrape the faces off of the road of people that don't wear seatbelts.

Lastly, if you've ever been to NYC there are almost as many cameras on the street as there are people. If a law were passed outlawing photos (which apparently isn't the case) I wouldn't sweat it cuz it wouldn't be enforcable.

 

[newrmdmike]

there was talk of legislation requiring permits to photograph in some parks . . . they were sick of photogs stomping plants or something.

most of these laws come about from too many a-hole photographers, and not enough considerate people.

while it may be a first amendment violation to pass such legislation, its bc people abuse rights, and government tries to check them.

 

[jstuedle]

I don't live there so I can only comment. I fear the "slippery sloop" when I read these stories. When vague laws are written, overzealous enforcement is always a problem. And public hearing notices buried in the back pages of the paper have the effect of meetings seldom heavily attended, by design. When the public says "We need a law", be careful what we wish for, we might get it.

 

[Seefutlung]

I think they (the authorities) are after the "pro" ... one who makes a nuisance with tripod and orders people around who mess up his/her shot.

Coastal cities in California fed up with wedding photogs who think they own the beach have enacted similar legislation. City of LA has similar laws for Hollywood and other "prime" locations because unbridled, (sorry just had to used that word), weddings have restricted the free flow of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and to get a piece of the action.

These laws aren't designed for the non-professional that are not inhibiting traffic or ordering people to get out of their shot ... but dollars to doughnuts cops who are bored or stupid or both will use this type of legislation to harass anyone with a SLR.

Gary