Topics

If you've been harassed taking photos...

 

If you've been harassed taking photos, this might be of interest:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Yes, the bill is still in committee, but it's statement of current, existing law is quite clear.

I downloaded the PDF (it looks very official) and keep a copy on my cell phone, just in case.

YMMV

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art

 

Thank you, Tracy. The bill appears to cover federal facilities and lands. Does the law cover the states as well?

Cheers,
David

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:42 PM Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:
If you've been harassed taking photos, this might be of interest:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Yes, the bill is still in committee, but it's statement of current, existing law is quite clear.

I downloaded the PDF (it looks very official) and keep a copy on my cell phone, just in case.

YMMV

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art

 

Hi David

First, INAL.

But then section 5 of the bill states as its basis the First Amendment of the Constitution, which, IMHO & INAL, pretty much covers it all, states included.

Things have lightened up a bit since 2015, and I have read of several successful suits filed against police (private and public) who confiscated memory cards and/or forced the deletion of images. That turns out to be "confiscation and destruction of evidence."

Always obey a guy with a gun, but you might politely show this PDF and point out that his/her actions are likely illegal.

YMMV

T



On 21 Nov 2018, at 18:16, David Clarkson wrote:

Thank you, Tracy. The bill appears to cover federal facilities and lands. Does the law cover the states as well?

Cheers,
David

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:42 PM Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:
If you've been harassed taking photos, this might be of interest:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Yes, the bill is still in committee, but it's statement of current, existing law is quite clear.

I downloaded the PDF (it looks very official) and keep a copy on my cell phone, just in case.

YMMV

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art


Tracy
www.valleau.art




--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art

David J. Gubernick
 

Unfortunately, that bill is dead.  Notice it was sent to the 113th Congress (2013-2014), the revised bill sent to 114th Congress (2015-2016) does not have the "Ansel Adams" part and  has a new name.  here's the link: H.R.5893 - No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2016

found a brief discussion of it here: https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/6jucbx/any_update_on_the_ansel_adams_act_that_protects/


David
David J. Gubernick

www.rainbowspirit.com

On 11/21/2018 6:28 PM, Tracy Valleau wrote:

Hi David

First, INAL.

But then section 5 of the bill states as its basis the First Amendment of the Constitution, which, IMHO & INAL, pretty much covers it all, states included.

Things have lightened up a bit since 2015, and I have read of several successful suits filed against police (private and public) who confiscated memory cards and/or forced the deletion of images. That turns out to be "confiscation and destruction of evidence."

Always obey a guy with a gun, but you might politely show this PDF and point out that his/her actions are likely illegal.

YMMV

T



On 21 Nov 2018, at 18:16, David Clarkson wrote:

Thank you, Tracy. The bill appears to cover federal facilities and lands. Does the law cover the states as well?

Cheers,
David

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:42 PM Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:
If you've been harassed taking photos, this might be of interest:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Yes, the bill is still in committee, but it's statement of current, existing law is quite clear.

I downloaded the PDF (it looks very official) and keep a copy on my cell phone, just in case.

YMMV

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art


Virus-free. www.avast.com

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art


David J. Gubernick
 

P.S.  here's a link to government tracking of bills that clearly states, it's dead.  https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr5893

David
David J. Gubernick
www.rainbowspirit.com

On 11/21/2018 6:28 PM, Tracy Valleau wrote:

Hi David

First, INAL.

But then section 5 of the bill states as its basis the First Amendment of the Constitution, which, IMHO & INAL, pretty much covers it all, states included.

Things have lightened up a bit since 2015, and I have read of several successful suits filed against police (private and public) who confiscated memory cards and/or forced the deletion of images. That turns out to be "confiscation and destruction of evidence."

Always obey a guy with a gun, but you might politely show this PDF and point out that his/her actions are likely illegal.

YMMV

T



On 21 Nov 2018, at 18:16, David Clarkson wrote:

Thank you, Tracy. The bill appears to cover federal facilities and lands. Does the law cover the states as well?

Cheers,
David

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:42 PM Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:
If you've been harassed taking photos, this might be of interest:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Yes, the bill is still in committee, but it's statement of current, existing law is quite clear.

I downloaded the PDF (it looks very official) and keep a copy on my cell phone, just in case.

YMMV

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art


Virus-free. www.avast.com

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art


 

Yup. Fortunately, Joe Sixpak the cop doesn't know that...

The fact is that bill just restated existing law. Everything it states was legal before the bill was entered, and it's still legal today. Authoritarian figures want authoritative references. That the bill died doesn't suddenly revoke the right photograhers have always had.

As I u nderstand it, from conversations with, and readings of lawyers: You can always take a photograph from a public place of a public place. There are no laws barring photographing buildings, tunnels, industrial plants or other structures or people in public places. You may not impeded traffic or safety or defy the lawful instructions of the police. You may not tresspass to take photographs nor take images in which people have an expectation of privacy. You cannot be charged a fee to photograph in public areas, including national parks.

in some cases your gear can be taken, but the images cannot be viewed or searched, nor can you be required to delete them without a court order.

but again: never argue with a guy with a gun. Just take good notes.

Here's a good place to start your own search:

https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/photographers-rights

Here's a card I printed and carry with me. (I have never had to use it.)

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

hth

Tracy




On 21 Nov 2018, at 19:06, David J. Gubernick wrote:

P.S.  here's a link to government tracking of bills that clearly states, it's dead.  https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr5893

David
David J. Gubernick
www.rainbowspirit.com

On 11/21/2018 6:28 PM, Tracy Valleau wrote:

Hi David

First, INAL.

But then section 5 of the bill states as its basis the First Amendment of the Constitution, which, IMHO & INAL, pretty much covers it all, states included.

Things have lightened up a bit since 2015, and I have read of several successful suits filed against police (private and public) who confiscated memory cards and/or forced the deletion of images. That turns out to be "confiscation and destruction of evidence."

Always obey a guy with a gun, but you might politely show this PDF and point out that his/her actions are likely illegal.

YMMV

T



On 21 Nov 2018, at 18:16, David Clarkson wrote:

Thank you, Tracy. The bill appears to cover federal facilities and lands. Does the law cover the states as well?

Cheers,
David

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:42 PM Tracy Valleau <tracy@...> wrote:
If you've been harassed taking photos, this might be of interest:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5893/text

Yes, the bill is still in committee, but it's statement of current, existing law is quite clear.

I downloaded the PDF (it looks very official) and keep a copy on my cell phone, just in case.

YMMV

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art


Virus-free. www.avast.com

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art



Tracy
www.valleau.art




--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.art