Blogger Damon Tucker is still asking. I don't have a definitive answer. I don't find any law against it, but proving a negative and all...
Nationally, there are a couple of notable cases in the news. An intriguing piece in the Seattle Times from 2007 reports that -
An amateur photographer who was taken into custody last year after shooting pictures of two Seattle police officers making an arrest on a public street received an $8,000 settlement this week, the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington announced Thursday.
USA Today technology columnist Andrew Kantor in a piece about misinformation about photography rights recounted
Kantor concludes that-
...the story of Neftaly Cruz, a senior at Penn State who on July 19 was not only harassed but taken into custody by Philadelphia police for obstructing an investigation. How did he do this? By taking pictures of the cops while standing on a public street.
Cruz's actions were absolutely and undoubtedly legal, and not surprisingly he was released without being charged with anything.
Kantor has a pair of columns on the rights of photographers (here and here) in which he asserts that one is free to photograph just about anything or anyone that one can see out in public. According to Kantor, the test is whether the subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus, according to Kantor, using a long lens to capture someone purchasing medications in a pharmacy is probably a violation of their privacy, but photographing someone walking along the public street is absolutely protected.
If Kantor is correct and a reasonable expectation of privacy is the correct test as to who or what we can photograph in public, then I would imagine police officers carrying on their duties in public are fair game for photographers.
(The same applies to buildings, by the way. According to Kantor, aside from certain military installations, we are free to photograph any building we please and no one can legally stop us or take away or make us erase the images we have taken).
5 comments:
Apparently, according to the South Dakota Supreme Court, under the First Amendment, I can yell "Eff you" to police officers (notice I wrote "can," not "should"). Seems if that action is ok, what's the big deal about photos?
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=21071
Thanks for checking on this. I did a few text searched on the Hawaii Revised Statutes. The term 'photograph' appears 51 times but there are only two real restrictions...
Child pornography (duh!)
And more interestingly...
326-30 Making or taking of pictures without permission prohibited. (a) No person shall photograph, film, or videotape any patient at any facility maintained by the department of health for the care and treatment of persons with Hansen's disease, without the written permission of the patient.
Anything visible from a public sidewalk (or other right of way) is fair game. The long lens idea is the exception, thus anything you could see with the "naked eye" is fair game.
As a press photog, that was how I conducted myself.
Of course, there are variables... US Postal installations. I'm not sure I would photograph in the parking lot. If I were standing on the sidewalk, it's a totally different story, but standing in the parking lot, is, essentially, Post Office property. Anytime I, as a journalist, photographed "on" any postal property, I made darn sure I was escorted by a designated postal representative.
As for the police officer, that's a whole 'nother ball of wax. Sure, you can take pix of a cop. But, do you really want to? Do you really need to? Again, are we on a public sidewalk, or the Post Office parking lot. Is a Post Office parking lot public or private? Is it a Federal "Office?"
Personally my first reaction would have been to drop the camera and talk with the cop. Smooth the situation, don't fan the flames. Sure, you have all the rights in the world, but pissing off a cop isn't helping anyone's cause. This probably isn't what people want to hear, but sometimes being a journalist means learning how to work with people, and assuring them that you mean no harm.
Not sure where I'm going with this, but situations like this bother me on several levels. It worries me that the police would be so hostile, but it also concerns me that this is just one more situation where the media is now perceived by one more cop as a jerk with a camera. I believe that there are times and places to pick fights, and it had better be some high-drama kick-ass spot news that will change the world. I see this as an unfortunate parking situation/handicap access issue, that could be investigated through interviews with the post master/concerned parties, coupled with photos taken with permission from the post master. If and when this is blocked, then you can resort to pressing your luck with cops. Even then, I would suspect that there would be ways to go about making pictures without freaking people out.
Just my thoughts...
-Rich
Whether you're on public or private property doesn't matter. What's important is (broadly speaking) A) whether the person you're shooting has an expectation of privacy and B) whether the shot you've taken shows them doing something they wouldn't want anyone else to see.
So you can take a picture of a guy in an office building lobby if that lobby is open to the public. There's no way he could say that he didn't think he could be seen. (If the owner tells you to stop, you might be trespassing, but the photos are still legal.)
That whole "You have to be on public property" argument is simply untrue. I can shoot in a mall if I want to; I only risk being kicked out and -- maybe -- charged with trespass if I ignore requests to leave.
Weird how the Konablog insist that Kantor is full of it:
"...As far as the link you sent me,I don’t believe it one bit.."
In regards to the Kantor Link.
http://damontucker.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/new-police-chief-on-violating-personal-rights/#comment-2094
Even funnier yet... the dude won't retract something he said on his blog...(like I would care) UNLESS I file a complaint against the police.
http://thekonablog.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/more-thoughts-on-damon-tuckers-pahoa-post-office-incident/#comments
Post a Comment