Photographer
C and J Photography
Posts: 1986
Hauula, Hawaii, US
Vanishing Point Ent wrote:
So it seems, that the marketing dept is guilty of violating Homeland
Security laws. Get them arrested. Have a name from
marketing ready to throw at the cops.
Second, in the " old days of film ", photojournalists kept an extra roll of
blank film, ready to hand over to authorities, by using a
simple sleight-of-hand, ( well practiced ) so they can get away with it.
Also, at the first sign of trouble, pull the good film card, from the camera,
hide it in your sock & have the blank one, in place in the camera, then
when they ask you to delete the images, just give them the empty card.
Sometimes, the OLD tricks can work just as well now. Or just get good data recovery software. Delete the files, pull the card and set it aside for recovery.
Or get a camera that writes to two cards simultaneously but only deletes from the one being read. 1D3 and many others do this.
Photographer
Random Shutter Clicks
Posts: 4114
PORTER CORNERS, New York, US
At some level we are all complicit with this. American society hasn't changed because someone else made it so. We allowed it. Now let's take it back.
jim
Photographer
J C ModeFotografie
Posts: 14718
Los Angeles, California, US
Jim Gupta-Carlson wrote:
At some level we are all complicit with this. American society hasn't changed because someone else made it so. We allowed it. Now let's take it back.
jim Amen and . . . amen!!!
Photographer
Timbre Rogers
Posts: 211
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Yes. Technically what he did is against the rules. Im saying rules and not laws. He, however, was wronged if the story verbatim is true. He cannot take pictures of the trains since 9/11. The trains and platforms are private property, as are buildings. He should have been told to cease and desist, be told that he is on private property and is not allowed to take pictures where he is standing and cannot take pictures of the property (including the trains). And if he refused, then, he can be arrested.
This is the crucial part. He must have been told he was trespassing, then refuse to leave, in order to be legally arrested. This holds true for all private property.
Photographer
Shashinka Ichiban
Posts: 227
Washington, District of Columbia, US
This is a similar situation at Washington DC's Union Station. There were so many complaints that the local TV station WTTG did an investigation. While in the station talking to an Amtrak representative, Amtrak police approached the news crew and asked them to stop taping, and to leave the property. I too have been detained several times at Union Station for taking pictures and threatened with arrest. I will note that I was once a railroad cop, not with Amtrak, but in another life. The policy of prohibiting non-ticketed passengers on the platform was not due to it being illegal to photograph trains as that is total bullshit, cop-out excuse but is a legal issue. The federal government and the judicial system had not been kind to the railroad involving accidents or deaths involving non-company people. Sadly in this country any person can walk down the right of way, be struck by a train and killed with the family then being awarded multi-million dollar awards by the courts because the railroad did not take appropriate action to keep trespassers away from the tracks. Railroad terminology for trespasser. Anyone who is not a ticketed passenger or in the employment of the company. I'm in no ways siding with Amtrak. In fact after being detailed on several occasions by them, I'd hope they do try to arrest me just so I can sick the ACLU after them. Personally, I think the entire railroad is waste of tax payer's money and should be completely disbanded and turned over to private companies, but I do know one thing about Amtrak policy and that is at every gate there are always signs posted stating "TICKETED PASSENGERS ONLY BEYOND THIS POINT". And G-d forbid you're going down a platform where there are no trains, Amtrak Police will pounce. http://www.flickr.com/groups/dcphotorights/ http://www.myfoxdc.com/myfox/pages/News … geId=3.7.1 http://www.flickr.com/groups/dcphotorig … 721167218/
Photographer
RobertGaliano
Posts: 1094
Gulfport, Mississippi, US
there are 2 sides to every story... untill we know in fact both sides of the story, we don't know anything.
i shoot in public places and on private property all the time, never a problem..
i pay attention to the RULES and the LAWS..
i let everyone know ahead of time what my intentions are, and they're usually supportive of what i'm doing.
in some cases i'm allowed more and better access to places i'm shooting, just by being nice, polite, and curteous, but most of all RESPECTFUL of police and security people and the job they are trying to do.
if i have to jump up and say "i have the right to...." all the time, i have failed as a true professional.
Photographer
Carl Evans
Posts: 86
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
I've done photography with Amtrak/for Amtrak all over the country. On the east coast, I have been questioned by authorities once. It was near Princeton, NJ. The officer was very cool. I've been in Amtrak police helicopters between Baltimore and NYC. I've been in other helicopters (non-Amtrak where we were photographing the train) and I placed a call to their dispatch and everything was kosher. Their concern is public safety and terrorism. It's a post 9/11 time. If a suspicion is gone unchecked and it goes bad, who is to blame? Amtrak is a public transportation division with their own police force...for a reason. They're doing their job in protecting the public that travels with them. Again, from San Francisco, Portland, Seattle to Baltimore, NYC, Providence, and everywhere in between; I've shot all over their rail line and stations and have had not one issue.
What did this guy do wrong? Where was his couth? I've done jobs without permits or permission in tons of places. I've been caught. I've gotten out of it all. Why? Cause I'm nice and tactful. You are not "entitled" cause you have a camera and "belong" there. Be nice! Help make it easier for us that work!
Photographer
sublime LightWorks
Posts: 6074
Atlanta, Georgia, US
glamour pics wrote:
Maybe the Amtrak suits shouldn't run a contest which anyone could see would lead to incidents like this. The contest was a trap to get terrorists out into the open and have the crack Amtrak defense force get them.
Photographer
Jerry Rybansky
Posts: 981
Bayonne, New Jersey, US
USA=Communist country for sure !
Photographer
Russell Coleman
Posts: 196
Wellington, England, United Kingdom
LarsLarsen wrote:
I heard it was the same in England. Taken from Wikipedia entry for London Underground
"Photography for personal use is permitted in public areas of the Underground, but the use of tripods and other supports is forbidden as it poses a danger in the often cramped spaces and crowds found underground. Flash photography is also forbidden as it may distract drivers and disrupt fire-detection equipment. For the same reason bright auto-focus assist lights should be switched off or covered when photographing in the Underground."
Although if you look at the Transport for London website http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/1517.aspx
They seem to want you to pay for a permit for any photography, then pay again if you want to use it commercially, and even then their T&C's exclude you from displaying your work on the internet.
Photographer
Merlinpix
Posts: 7118
Farmingdale, New York, US
sublime LightWorks wrote:
The contest was a trap to get terrorists out into the open and have the crack Amtrak defense force get them. Ah Ha! I knew it!
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
Howard Garcia wrote:
I'm sorry, please point out where in this quotation does it clearly says that we are allowded to take pictures anywhere we want. Its extremely rare that our legislature legislates in terms of passing laws in what its citizenery CAN do. Its generally accepted that if there isn't a law against it, you can do whatever.
The photography permission thing falls under the 1st Amendment, specifically the free speech clause. Its like newspaper photographers can shoot whatever & whomever they want if they are standing on a sidewalk, which is considered community property. But the moment their toe is, let's say, the property of some Hollywood starlett's house, their right to photography said starlett ends.
There are exception, at least that I can see as it applies to this case, is where a clear & present danger is involved. When that happens, the rights conflict & thus is a matter for the courts to sort out which takes precedence.
I'll use the case of flag burning, Texas versus Johnson. In that case, the 1st amendment, free speech clause, was more important than a Texas state law against "vandalizing respected objects." It got hashed out in the courts & they eventually sided w/ Johnson, upholding his right to burn the flag.
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
LarsLarsen wrote:
Its fun when you're telling a cop that what he thinks is a crime is not even close to any law on the books. And that he can only stick you with a bogus charge that will get thrown out. I.E. Harass you. They either realize you're right, or start repeating that its a crime in a LOUDER TONE OF VOICE, as if they talk louder they're going to be more "right". Ah, yes! The Fox Newsation of American discourse.
Photographer
RGK Photography
Posts: 4695
Wilton, Connecticut, US
c_d_s wrote:
Rebel Photo wrote:
the contest:
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentSe … y&ssid=180
Most likely, the local Police are telling what the security guards are to do. Somehow, the security guards forget just who signs the checks. Maybe the guy should have read the rules posted on that site:
Maybe you should read what you post.
Instead, stay in public access areas, such as stations
Photographer
Lumigraphics
Posts: 32780
Detroit, Michigan, US
Fiat Lux Photography wrote:
Yes. Technically what he did is against the rules. Im saying rules and not laws. He, however, was wronged if the story verbatim is true. He cannot take pictures of the trains since 9/11. The trains and platforms are private property, as are buildings. He should have been told to cease and desist, be told that he is on private property and is not allowed to take pictures where he is standing and cannot take pictures of the property (including the trains). And if he refused, then, he can be arrested.
This is the crucial part. He must have been told he was trespassing, then refuse to leave, in order to be legally arrested. This holds true for all private property. That's bullshit. 9/11 has nothing to do with not being allowed to take pictures of trains. THAT IS NOT ILLEGAL!!!!
Photographer
Doug Lester
Posts: 10591
Atlanta, Georgia, US
Reading through this thread, I began to think of places I have been chased away from by police or security while taking photos. They included several shopping malls, a shopping mall parking lot, Union Station in Washington DC, a department store, the end of an airport runway, a railroad over pass, in front of a bank and probably others which have not come to mind. And yes, on occasion there were threats about confiscating my film or camera.
What did all of those have in common? They were all on private property. I should also note those took place in the mid 1960s to early 1970s. So what has changed after 9/11?
They guy in the OP referred to was on private property and in an area which is often restricted to ticket holders. No one has rights on private property other than those granted by the property owner.
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Fiat Lux Photography wrote:
The trains and platforms are private property, as are buildings. He should have been told to cease and desist, be told that he is on private property and is not allowed to take pictures where he is standing and cannot take pictures of the property (including the trains). And if he refused, then, he can be arrested. Amtrak trains are public property.
Photographer
JBPhoto
Posts: 1107
Belleville, Michigan, US
I was doing a fashion shoot on some tracks not long after 9-11. An Amtrack train was coming, saw us near the tracks, probably assumes the worst (one of the models was wearing a trenchcoat) and stopped. Got a call from the feds a few days later...they were calling us separately and trying to trip us up w/their questions. I was crapping my pants for a week, but they finally figured we were cool ( and somewhat stupid in retrospect) and didn't file charges.
Photographer
Wet Ltd
Posts: 1936
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
rp_photo wrote:
Amtrak trains are public property. Actually they are not. Amtrak is the operating arm of the National Passenger Railroad Corporation. A public stock traded company created by government act in 1972. It has 109 million shares of preferred stock issued and 9.3 million shares of common stock according to their 2007 annual report. They receive government operating loans and operating subsidies from the local, state and federal levels not unlike airlines operating essential air service, or the small community air service program.
Photographer
SayCheeZ!
Posts: 20615
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Rebel Photo wrote:
the contest:
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentSe … y&ssid=180
Most likely, the local Police are telling what the security guards are to do. Somehow, the security guards forget just who signs the checks. Thanks for providing the link.
I was totally on the side of the photographer in this matter until I read the following which is published on the Amtrak contest page:
Amtrak wrote:
SAFETY FIRST!
Amtrak reminds the public and especially those who may photograph a train to stay out of danger. It is very important to stay away from tracks, moving trains, yards, railroad structures (such as bridges, trestles, towers and wires) and the railroad right-of-way. Photographers must not trespass on railroad property or on private property adjacent to the railroad. Instead, stay in public access areas, such as stations, sidewalks or parking lots. All participants agree to assume the risk of harm and release Amtrak from all liability for personal injury and loss of property. Photographers are reminded that railroad tracks, trestles, yards and equipment are private property and that trespassers are subject to arrest and fines. Some stations served by Amtrak trains require advance permission for photography. Always obey all local rules and laws.
Photographer
Bill Tracy Photography
Posts: 2322
Montague, New Jersey, US
He should have been using an eye-fi card while carrying a laptop where the eye-fi card would have been sending the images to. Then he could have just deleted the images off the card giving them a false sense of victory - LOL!!
Just a thought - LOL!
Photographer
WMcK
Posts: 5298
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
I think it has been suggested before, but the simplest thing would have been for him to wipe the card in front of the police, show them there was nothing on it, then go home and use data recovery software.
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Assuming the camera uses CF cards, an SD-to-CF adpter could be used, which would make it appear that any SD cards that happen to be seen weren't even usable with that camera.
Photographer
Jason J Photography
Posts: 983
Mesquite, Texas, US
the poor excuse for a transit system we have here in Dallas has its own mayberry police force too. They are ususally writing tickets in the HOV lane for one occupant cars, but they always have a couple on random trains. Random trains during rush hours has a "fare collector" who is actually a $10.00 an hour employee with official id and no gun who has the right to throw you off the train. Our train is on the honor system (seriously, and they wonder why they cant seem to increase revenue) with no turnstyles etc and there are so many people on the trains the fare collectors who check tickets can only do one, maybe two cars between stops. This insures they are ALWAYS pissed off, wishing they were at home/topless bar, or any number of things but dealing with you. I have watched countless times where someone who was cocky or rude to them just got the "you need to get off at the next stop" bit for no reason and when they didnt, the guy just called the dart cops and they get tossed with a trespassing charge.. On the same train I have covered the time with my thumb on my 90 minute one way ticket I bought 6 hours before, flashed as they walked by and wished them a good day and they went right along... Point being he prob could have complied with moving on and been tactful and resumed elswhere or the next day etc..The transit cops here pull the trasspassing thing ANYTIME they want to screw with you because thats thier one size fits all case. We have a couple of underground terminals and they are all posted no photography and its like they have a sensor that detects the em field of a ccd sensor, because they are on top of a camera before the lens cap is off..Trying/acting like your going to take a pic will get you an immediate trespassing charge. The local alt. rag has done dozens of articles on them and thier dirty trespassing tacticts to no avail or reform. Heck we still dont even have bike racks on busses!
Also, I would likely have just palmed the CF card while talking to them and slipped a spare by and shown it as deleted and they likely would have been happy. I agree he shouldnt have to delete them, but just make them think theyve submitted you and you walk away with some shots for the day and no jail.
I bet even if he proves his innocence etc, the amount spent on legal fees will be astounding. Certainly worth some nice gear. Hooray for martyrs and champions of a cause, but one of them I am not.. I would rather go home at the end of the day than jail...
Photographer
Burk Young
Posts: 27
Glen Allen, Virginia, US
Photographer
Christian Hough Nudes
Posts: 6
London, England, United Kingdom
Its the same situation in London. Probably cos all the terrorists like to use huge digital camera bodies with a big set of lenses to make themselves obvious to the authorities.... in fact you can get arrested for protesting in London within a mile of the Houses of Parliament. Animal Farm, 1984... Orwell you were a prophet. Christian www.christianhough.com
Photographer
Jeffrey Engel
Posts: 22327
Waltham, Massachusetts, US
Howard Garcia wrote:
I want to see the law that says you can shoot anywhere you want. Caradoc wrote:
First you have to show us the law that says you're allowed to post on Model Mayhem. Exactly
Photographer
Jeffrey Engel
Posts: 22327
Waltham, Massachusetts, US
SayCheeZ! wrote:
I was totally on the side of the photographer in this matter until I read the following which is published on the Amtrak contest page: Amtrak wrote:
SAFETY FIRST!
Amtrak reminds the public and especially those who may photograph a train to stay out of danger. It is very important to stay away from tracks, moving trains, yards, railroad structures (such as bridges, trestles, towers and wires) and the railroad right-of-way. Photographers must not trespass on railroad property or on private property adjacent to the railroad. Instead, stay in public access areas, such as stations, sidewalks or parking lots. All participants agree to assume the risk of harm and release Amtrak from all liability for personal injury and loss of property. Photographers are reminded that railroad tracks, trestles, yards and equipment are private property and that trespassers are subject to arrest and fines. Some stations served by Amtrak trains require advance permission for photography. Always obey all local rules and laws. The photographer WAS in a public access area. He was on the platform which is in the station, which Amtrak suggests shooting from!
Photographer
photosbydmp
Posts: 3808
Shepparton-Mooroopna, Victoria, Australia
amtrak 145 taken guerilla style @ williams AZ, in these still troubled times i find guerilla style is your best friend whether your shooting in the usa or australia. Take the shot you need and leave at speed.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
glenn my name today wrote:
There clearly are places where photography is NOT allowed, such as the entrances to bridges and tunnels. Photography is allowed of the entrances to bridges and tunnels. It just depends on where you are standing when you take the photo.
Just as photography is allowed in any public place.
Most of the exceptions don't involve the act of photography in it's own. For instance if I was in Penn Station and I set up a tripod (which I have done many times in the past year) and that tripod was blocking the movement of people I could be asked to stop. Not stop taking photos but stop blocking the flow of people because that is the intended purpose of the space. I could also be subject to arrest for blocking the flow of people not for the act of photography.
It is against the law to urinate in public in other than a place intended for the purpose, which does not include a bush along the side of the road even if they are commonly used for the purpose.
I'm just finding this post. I'll comment as I read them.
I'll also touch on trespassing. Ignorance of the law is not a defense in most cases. However the definition of trespassing in NY State is "140.05 Trespass. A person is guilty of trespass when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises. Trespass is a violation." You have to KNOW you are trespassing to be guilty of it. Conspicuous signs are generally consider proof that you know you are trespassing. In my case I do not believe the signs are conspicuous. Also I arrived on the platform with licence and privilege, being dropped there by NJ Transit. At no time was I informed that my licence and privilege to be on the platform were revoked so I did not remain in the area knowingly without licence and privilege.
Also trespassing is subject to the purpose for which one enters upon a premise. If there is a driveway with no trespassing signs on it. You enter the driveway with the purpose of finding the owner to speak to them, you are not trespassing. But, after you find the owner and the owner says to you, "Get out of here, I don't want to talk to you." if you don't leave immediately you are trespassing.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
Wet Ltd wrote:
The Department of Homeland Security has enacted the rules that tripped this photographer up. The rules are contained in the "Rail Transportation Security" act as part of 49 CFR 1520 and 1580. The act and background is downloadable from the TSA website. These rules do nothing to prohibit photography of trains or of standing in a public place that happens to belong to a railroad. If you still believe they do please post the actual sections. My review of the documents found nothing.
While the property I was on is private, It belongs to the National Railroad Passenger Corp. ("Amtrak") a corporation that is wholely owned by the goverment of the US. I was in a publicly open portion of the station. If it wasn't a public place I would not have been there.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
Rowen wrote:
What we need to do is find a really good artist, have him set up his easel and paints in Penn Station, and begin painting the same relative picture that this photographer was trying to photograph.
It would be interesting to see what the cops would say about an artist painting a picture as opposed to a photographer taking an image of the same *scene*.
Just a thought.....
-R It's not necessary to to this, it's already been done.
"The visual arts, including photography, are expression protected by the First Amendment. See Hurley v. Irish-Am. Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Group of Boston, 515 U.S. 557, 569 (1995) (recognizing that the First Amendment protects the "painting of Jackson Pollock"); Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343, U.S. 495, 501-02 (1952) (holding "that expression by means of motion pictures is included within the free speech . . . guaranty of the" First Amendment). Just as the First Amendment protects the newsgathering process in addition to the final news report, it protects both publication of visual art and the process that culminates in a piece of visual art. See Amato v. Wilentz, 753 F. Supp. 543 (D.N.J. 1990), rev'd on other grounds, 952 F.2d 742 (3d Cir. 1991) (holding that state action prohibiting the filming of a movie violated the First Amendment); cf. Gannett Satellite Info. Network, Inc. v. Berger, 894 F.2d 61, 69 (3d Cir. 1990) (holding that "[t]here is no question that" a regulation restricting the sale of newspapers burdens free expression). It is not just photographs that are protected expression, therefore, but also the act of taking a photography - the very step in the expressive process that Amtrak's actions prohibit."
Rowen wrote:
We can thank the fear mongering and scare tactics of the past 8 years for this kind of shit. While it is true that any place could be victim of a terrorist attack, I think we've really gone over the edge on all this shit. Personal opinion only.
-R It's actually been longer than the past 8 year. This goes all the way back to before the raise of Oprah Winfrey and John Walsh (America's [Actually the UNITED STATE'S] Most Wanted). Growing up how many times were you told not to speak to strangers? This is the start of this, not the past 8 years.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
Robb Mann wrote:
Wow. I took photos in the NYC subway and Path trains over Thanksgiving. I had no idea I was risking arrest. Last I heard the laws against photography in NYC trains had been deemed unconstitutional... Geesh. Photography in the NYC Subway system is allowed. Photography on the PATH is currently not allowed unless you have a permit and are with an employee escort.
The rules are posted online for PATH.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
Gil Rivera wrote:
We should all (photographers) organise a protest. Lets go to that platform with our cameras and snap away at the same time. I thought about this. While it would be amusing to see the cops trying to figure out what to do it won't solve the problem. When they get us alone they will still abuse us and make unlawful orders.
There are only two ways to fix this. 1. Someone to push it into the courts and have a ruling by a judge that they have to follow all over the country. 2. Have everyone that the cops harass for taking photos file civil rights law suits and settle them. After they pay enough settlements the harassment will stop.
So as much as I'd love to show up with 100 + others with cameras in Penn Station, perhaps we should do it anyway, I don't really think it's the cure.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
10X Images wrote:
I have unique perspective on this and I am really interested in finding out the outcome of the case. Anyone know where to follow up on the outcome? I'm in California.
Thanks!
Happy NewYear by the way! I will be posting updates on my website http://amtrak.duanek.name, my email is [email protected] if you care to write to me.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
isphotography wrote:
penn station NY is a restricted military zone, it is not a public street or sidewalk, their is no right to shoot pictures there, unless you got a permit, or military escort! Can you please provide a reference to such a claim. Thank you.
Photographer
DkingNY
Posts: 13
White Plains, New York, US
I believe at one time the NYPD was told that they should lay off the photographers, unfortunately we are going to have some police acting without knowing the true law. I do know that at one time there was a law, and its still is on the books that photography in the subways is illegal. This goes back to the beginning where photographers would use flash powder, thus causing track fires. We all since then, no one uses flash powder anymore, but the law is still on the books. If some police officer really wanted to make your life miserable, he can.
Photographer
TouchofEleganceStudios
Posts: 5480
Vallejo, California, US
Wet Ltd wrote:
The Department of Homeland Security has enacted the rules that tripped this photographer up. The rules are contained in the "Rail Transportation Security" act as part of 49 CFR 1520 and 1580. The act and background is downloadable from the TSA website. While this is true permission was extended in this act by Amtrak "Amtrak's annual photo contest". And much better yet I found this in a search:
"WASHINGTON - Calling all shutterbugs! Amtrakâs fifth annual "Picture Our Train" photo contest is underway. Amtrak employees and rail fans are invited to submit their best photograph of an Amtrak train , with the winning image to be featured on Amtrakâs 2009 wall calendar.
Amtrak encourages passengers and train enthusiasts to enter their best shot of Amtrak equipment for the chance to receive a $1,000 travel voucher and a photo credit on the calendar. The four runners-up will receive travel vouchers ranging from $100 to $500"
Here is the link for anyone who wants to read it and I would say why doesn't every photographer on MM who can steal time run out and shoot. If they arrest enough people the lawsuits will end up with photographers owning Amtrak!
http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=65461
I think that this photographer is going to be rich or at the least get alot more than $1,000.
Photographer
Duane P Kerzic
Posts: 20
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, US
isphotography wrote:
NJTtransit police were evidently arresting people who where taking pictures of trains from the publicly owned land near the train tracks. I heard they changed their procedures, so they will only arrest ya if your taking pictures from njt owned land The NPPA (national press photographer assoc.), which is the real photographers rights group, threated to sue NJ Transit over NJT's proposed rulemaking and NJT did not enact the ruling. For a period of time NJT did require a photo permit but has not also dropped that requirement. There are times when NJT Police may try to harass you but NJT's public relations dept is on top of this and as long as you ahve the person's name or other way to identify them are very pro-active about correcting wrongs.
To quote from NJT "NJ TRANSIT allows photographs to be taken of facilities and equipment as long as all safety and security procedures are followed. However, effective January 1, 2006, the requirement for a Photo Pass, temporary or Photo ID, has been eliminated. As such, photo permits are no longer a requirement to take photographs in publicly accessible areas on NJ TRANSIT property. Please note that this pertains to non-commercial photography only. Commercial photographers must still have a contract with NJ TRANSIT if they wish to film or conduct photo shoots. Scout photos taken by location scouts do not require a pass if the photos will not be sold."
|
