I carry my camera with me everywhere I go. I know I'm not alone on this because as photographers we know that the greatest shots often come at the least expected times and I never want to be unprepared for those great moments.
I also like to take street shots to document the general goings on of the city and those around me and I can't imagine not being "allowed" to do this. I also can't imagine what the world of photography would be without the astounding images of Cartier-Bresson or Garry Winograd.
However, in our current fearful society photographers are becoming increasingly harrassed for taking pictures. I've been approached time and time again by mall security, managers of stores or even random people on the street asking if they were in my picture and I'm one of the relatively cautious ones about this! I know many people who aren't and as my own personal philosophy I like to protect the wishes of those who choose not to be in my pictures but being told by people that I'm "not allowed" makes me mad.
Apparently here in Vancouver we aren't allowed to take pictures in the skytrain stations. This was made very clear to me by security at the Granville Street Station when I asked if I could take pictures. The security guard on duty told me that since 9/11 they have become extremely sticky about picture taking in the stations however I didn't look like a terrorist so sure, I could go down the escalator into a "paid fare zone" (without a paid fare, I might add) to take a couple of shots. (I will refrain from leaving my thoughts on what terrorists "look like" and double standards and the like...)
I'm not sure exactly what people get so up in arms about. Ironically, unrestricted photography by private citizens has played a huge role in protecting the freedom, security and well-being of all people. In fact, photography has contributed to improvements in civil rights, curbed abusive child labor practices, and provided important information in investegating crimes. Photography has not contributed to a decline in public safety. No terrorist acts have ever been dependent on or even involved photography and restrictions on photography would not have prevented any of these acts.
Awhile back a friend sent me this link to a Photographers Rights from a legal standpoint when photographing public places. Unfortunately it's an american version and I've yet to find anything similar done up specifically for Canada.
As someone who shoots often and gets harrassed nearly as often I feel it important to know the things laid out in this article.
In case you don't click the link here are a few of the points I found most interesting:
1. Property owners may legally prohibit photography on their premises but have no right to prohibit others from photographing their property from other locations.
2. Anyone can be photographed in a public place without their consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, etc.
3. The following subjects can almost always be photographed lawfully from public places: accident and fire scenes, children, celebrities, bridges and other infrastructure, criminal activities, law enforcement officers.
4. security is rarely a legitimate reason for restricting photography.
5. You are under no obligation to explain the purpose of your photography nor do you have to disclose your identity except upon request by a law enforcement officer. (NOT A MALL SECURITY GUARD!)
6. Absent of a court order noone has the right to confiscate your film. Doing so can constitute a criminal offence such as theft, coercion or harrassment.
Disclaimer: This is a general education guide about the right to take photographs and is necessarily limited in scope. This is not intended to be legal advice.
Hi Marti, Sharing/publishing
Hi Marti,
Sharing/publishing this photo is probably not against the law, unless she is a young offender. However, she might attempt a civil lawsuit, because you "damaged" her by getting her in trouble, even though she was doing the wrong thing.
Paul
Aaaayyyyyy! Here's a film
Aaaayyyyyy!
Here's a film about how it's YOUR right to film in public spaces and don't let anyone tell you otherwise, Freedom to Film, http://www.worldbytes.org/programmes/013/013_004.html
I LOVE this article and have
I LOVE this article and have a question that I think you answered, but not positive..
I took a couple pictures of my loser drunk/drug head neighbors abusing drugs with their kids less than a foot from them ( breathing it all in). She was sitting on her porch on the front of her house and I took the picture from inside my house, across the street. Could I get in trouble if I showed this picture to another party (her probation officer, since a condition of her release was no drugs/alcohol)...thanks
Marti
i've been suffering from
i've been suffering from various types of bad health related issues in the past year and i am always looking for more information.
such a superb post. i really enjoyed reading it. i'm not a great fan of such sort of matters. all the while i don't understand how i have not seen this post.
anyways , my own beliefs on dis topic are plentiful, so i won't share them right here and right now. i
will like to delve much more into the topic. i have
placed this post with my favorite list and will be discussing it with my family.
cheerio.
http://buygenericxanax.wordpress.com/
In answer to static, even
In answer to static, even though a property is open to public use and throughfare (the mall) it is still public property and you are still subject to the policies of the owner.
Just something for all to remember, if someone takes your camera or attempts to take your camera by threatening you, they have committed Robbery. The actoof theft or attempted theft through vilence or the threat ofviolence has committed the offence of Robbery. Call the police right away. If the officer choses not to proceed with the charge (that is their choioce) you can still go see a Justice of the Peace at the courts and lay an information against the perpetrator yourself which WILL result in them being charged. However, it is then up to you toprove the charge.
Hey man,This is the closest
Hey man,This is the closest I've found to a Canadian Photographers' Rights card: http://ambientlight.ca/laws.shtml
Ive been told by RCMP that
Ive been told by RCMP that it is highly illegal to photograph an officer on duty without his consent. I dont believe it, but I didnt feel like arguing at the time. They were quite angry, and I had been drinking a little, so I decided not to press the issue further. Im very interested in finding a Canadian version of the photographers rights so I can avoid such situatiions in the future...
it is legal to take pictures
it is legal to take pictures in the mall, it is private property but it is open to public so it is allowed. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2005-12-29-camera-laws_x.htm heres an excerpt(sp?) from that article"If you can see it, you can shoot itLet's get the easy stuff out of the way. Aside from sensitive government buildings (e.g., military bases), if you're on public property you can photograph anything you like, including private property. There are some limits — using a zoom lens to shoot someone who has a reasonable expectation of privacy isn't covered — but no one can come charging out of a business and tell you not to take photos of the building, period.Further, they cannot demand your camera or your digital media or film. Well, they can demand it, but you are under no obligation to give it to them. In fact, only an officer of the law or court can take it from you, and then only with a court order. And if they try or threaten you? They can be charged with theft or coercion, and you may even have civil recourse. Cool. (For details, see "The Photographer's Right.")It gets better.You can take photos any place that's open to the public, whether or not it's private property. A mall, for example, is open to the public. So are most office buildings (at least the lobbies). You don't need permission; if you have permission to enter, you have permission to shoot. In fact, there are very few limits to what you're allowed to photograph. Separately, there are few limits to what you're allowed to publish. And the fact that they're separate issues — shooting and publishing — is important. We'll get to that in a moment.You can take any photo that does not intrude upon or invade the privacy of a person, if that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Someone walking in a mall or on the street? Fair game. Someone standing in a corner, looking at his new Prozac prescription? No. Using a long lens to shoot someone in an apartment? No.Note that the limits have nothing to do with where you are when you take the shots; it's all about the subject's expectation of privacy. You can be on private property (a mall or office-building lobby), or even be trespassing and still legally take pictures. Whether you can be someplace and whether you can take pictures are two completely separate issues."
While I believe that
While I believe that Canadian Law would be similar to US law
there may be significant differences,even on a province to province basis.Since we are discussing LEGAL rights here,it is critical that the information be correct and defencible.I am still searching for Canadian information.
Hi there, I think your site
Hi there, I think your site is great. I had a question regarding someone taking my picture while i was walking my dog and then they posted it on the internet. Let me explain. I was on contract with a company that sells restaurants, the owner's son had bad publicity follow him and when I became aware of it, I set out to make sure that the deals I had went through without any issues, well my customers ended up backing out of their contracts and demanded their money back from the company...well I eventually left the company and the customers still think that I work there...the picture was taken of me during my contract and the customer was on the road and I was on my townhouse parking lot (private property)...they posted my picture with name on the internet and now any future employers may see it and it could affect me getting a job in the future...is there anything I can do to get them to take off my picture and name?....
Some things I have learnt.
Some things I have learnt. Photographing on private property makes you quilty of trespass. The photos are still legal unless you run into privacy issues or trade secret stuff. No one (short of a police officer) has the right to detain you or take your camera/film. That would make it kidnapping and theft. Malls are 'open to the public', until you are formally told you are no longer welcome (it is what they tell shoplifters). I personally have never seen a 'do not photograph' sign anywhere. This includes public pools. My experience is that management could care less about there legal footing and say no to everything. PIPEDA is often used as a catch all, but it explicilty does not apply to individuals, or the media (and photographers).
This is an interesting
This is an interesting topic. I have been searching for 'Rights of Citizens against Invasion of privacy", and I found your site. My husband and my children were photographed in a public place, and on private property by a Government sponsored agency. Since the advent of this new media photography and video, it has been used to violate "privacy" and there is a fine line between 'Right and Privacy of the Individual". It is in the medium of usage of these images is the question. In Print, Online or to be used to violate the Individuals Freedom, Speech and/or misrepresentation of facts.
Wow I am glad to see that I a
Wow I am glad to see that I am not the only Canadian who is finding it hard to find a Canadian version of the Photographers Rights. But I was able to find a UK version of the Photographers rights at [url]http://www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf [/url] .Since most Canadian Laws are based on British Common Laws, I figure that it is closer to our laws than the US version. The reason I went looking today for Canadian Rights of Photograhers is that I was taking photographs of my brother-in-law today using an outside wall of my condominium building as a backdrop, when the building superintendent came out and told me that I was not allow to photograph on or around common areas of the building. Ok maybe he has a point but it was his following statements that got me wanting to know my rights. He stated that it was illegal for me to take pictures of the property, even while off the property. Than to continue his rant he even claimed it was illegal to take any persons picture or a picture of their property or possessions without there permission where ever they are. I have encountered others with these opinions and have even been threatened to have the police called because I would not erase a picture I took of their car on a public street, claiming invasion of privacy. I wish there was a Canadian Photographers’ rights, I would put them on a small card and carry them with me at all times, just like I do my camera.
As I commented on your site,
As I commented on your site, Andrew, you've come up with a great set of resources for photographers. Thanks for your work on this issue and for sharing it with us here. I would encourage static readers to check out andrew's link in his comment. He's got awesome info in there.
The only drawback being that once again, it's american information. That doesn't mean that it isn't useful to us here....it totally is, as a guideline. But as in the case with the photographers right's pdf. I'm not certain how relevent the info is to us in Canada.
It's definitely worth a read, anyways. Andrew has awesome examples that explain how and when things are legal and not and where the line gets fuzzy.
The Photographer’s Right is
The Photographer’s Right is a kick-ass resource. I've pointed a dozen people to it. My only problem was that it didn't answer all my questions, such as "Can I take photos on private property without permission?" and "What happens if I do?"
I ended up doing the research starting from The Photographer's Right, eventually coming up with a "superset" of that information -- pretty much a cheat sheet on U.S. law when it comes to taking pictures. Wrote a Word doc, turned it into a PDF, and posted it (with references) on my blog.
You might find it useful. (You might not. :)
http://www.kantor.com/blog/2005/12/legal_rights_of_photographers.html.
I more than welcome tips, suggestions, corrections, and other ideas. Lemme know!
Andrew
People tend to get all jumpy
People tend to get all jumpy when they see cameras in odd places. Then there are those of us who feel the odder the place we get our camera the better!
That whole clothing designer thing (which I've run into a few times with my camera) is totally lame too. They told me in a clothing store on Robson that I couldn't take a picture of my friend in their store because I may get the clothing in the background and try and copy the design. However, when I asked about their return policy they assured me that anything I bought could be returned as long as the tags are still on it. So why exactly would I take a picture and get an article of clothing in the background to copy it when I could just buy it, measure it, flip it inside out, trace it exactly and then return it?
I got yelled at in Safeway th
I got yelled at in Safeway this afternoon for trying to take pictures of display cases full of dead turkeys waiting to be removed from their mesh bags and roasted for Christmas.
I was told that it's "totally illegal!" to take photos in here. I'll assume she knows better than me.... but it doesn't make much sense to me. In a clothing store, I can see they might worry about you stealing their designs from the photos, or something... but what am I going to do with my turkey photos? (Okay, I can think of a few things, but...)
You're completely right about
You're completely right about the mall being private property. What I'm trying to figure out is if private property being made available to the public changes the fact that we can shoot on it.
Obviously we can't just go into someone's private home and take pictures without asking but anyone can go into a mall.
And to take it a step further, even many of our parks are private property. Does this mean we can't take pictures of picnics we have their with our children?
I mean, really, people have teeny tiny camera's or camera phones and are shooting EVERYWHERE without security even noticing. Why should I be discriminated against for having a big ol' slr?
It's probable that ThePhotogr
It's probable that ThePhotographersRight is written from an American point of view with an eye toward American law. I don't know how Canadian law may differ (the Official Secrets Act being a major high-level difference that leaps to mind).
The one thing is that a mall
The one thing is that a mall is not really a public place, but private property. So if you're taking pictures of the mall from the street the security guard doesn't have a say, but if you're in a mall they do.
That's sort of an interesting thing that's happened in the past few decades, our public centres have really become private. We don't hang out in parks, or downtown areas as much as we do in malls, theatres and restaurants. By we I mean westerners in the western world. We no longer really have a public square or meeting place that is truly public and not private.
Post new comment