Picture NY (City photography ban.... )

This is a link to something very important to all of us.
New York City is about to pass a law requireing all photographers to have a
permit to photograph in the city. You will be required to have it if you are standing in one place for more than a half hour, or ten minutes with a tripod. You will also be
required to have $10 million dollar liability insurance polocy. This law is
being fast tracked and would take effect 30 days after passing. The city held public hearings on it and of cours no one showed up as no one knew about it.
THIS IS FOR REAL, NO JOKE...There is an article in todays NY Times about it
also.
This applies to all, Professional, amatuer, tourists, anyone with a camera.

http://www.pictureny.org/petition/

This is the biggest load of bull**** I have ever heard. Liability insurance? WTF. Bloomberg is turning this city into the most terribly over controlled place I have ever seen. Is that even possible. What are they going to do if they catch me with my DSLR? Come on now.

Are you sure this isn't for "motion picture" cameras or professional photographers who do model shoots? This sounds like the City is trying to stem the tide of guerilla film makers who block off certain sections of a sidewalk for hours on end. They make pedestrians walk between the parked cars and the street and can be a tad disruptive. If this law is indeed for all photographers then I will sign it. If it applies to motion pictures, pro photogs and the like who disrupt the flow, welp..................

ANYONE, taking photos or video for more than 30 minutes or with a tripod for more than 10 minutes is restricted by this law.

http://www.nycaviation.com/forum/vie...hp?f=14&t=7172

just means move 5 feet every 10 minutes... lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cancidas

just means move 5 feet every 10 minutes... lol

---

Nope:

Quote:

---

The rules define a “single site” as any area within 100 feet of where filming begins. Under the rules, the two or more people would not actually have to be filming, but could simply be holding an ordinary camera and talking to each other.

---

I'd like to see the "photo police" pull over a busload of tourist taking pictures on the Greyline, or the tourboats that go up and down the Hudson PROMOTING bring your cameras, take pictures of the skyline.
Yes, this bill may cover all photography, but lets get serious, the police have much more important things to be worried about.

But thats not quite the point...

What do some NYC police LOVE to do when they see a spotter??? Harass them and tell them it is illegal. This bill could do just that, Unless you want to move 100 feet every half an hour, your breaking a law, and therefore can be charged under this bill!

So you can no longer to the empire state building observation tower for more than 30 minutes. Well this is crap.

I spoke with the "Mayor's Office of Film, Theatre & Broadcasting"
today and indeed this law is "for real".

It will theoretically impact just about anyone.

The story the Mayor's office tells is that there was a dispute
between the NYPD and a guy taking pictures of the Chrysler Building a
year (or more) ago. Cops arrested the guy and later turned out the
photographer was shown to be legit guy on an assignment (pro, semi-
pro, whatever - I have no idea.)

Anyway, the NYCLU sued the city for not having rule(s) in place of
who can or can't do what under what circumstances etc. In other words
insufficient guidelines to be harrassing the guy in question.

The City has now complied with this "law" we see, in a capricious fashion, and so clearly everyone is now caught in a pissing war between The ACLU and the City
of New York.

I tried calling the NYCLU to see what their official line is on
this, especially since the City is giving the blame to them, but
sadly the NYCLU is not as easily reachable as the City..not that the
City was in any way helpful. They certainly were not. Phoney sympathy
and a disengenous "we agree with you" and thats it.

Clearly Bloomberg has gone about as far as he should in political
office. Its quite ironic considering how loosely Guiliani was
referred to as an athoritarian or "fascist".

Guess I'll be getting arrested in the future because I am sure not
going to stop what I am doing.

Tom

This is outrageous. I am calling my lawyer. :) This is not right for the city to limit our hobby. My dad works in city hall so he would get the news first on the law. I don't think the city council will pass it and if we could, the nycaviation gang could protest outside the steps of city hall!

I'm sorry... but your city is pretty ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PHL Approach

I'm sorry... but your city is pretty ridiculous.

---

Bloomberg is pretty rediculous. What in the heck did the buildings and real estate ever do to you? :twisted:

I can't believe what I'm reading about this photgraphy ban bull ****! Mr. Bloomberg is turning NYC into a police state, and I don't think anyone can do anything about it either. If this thing goes through watch out for other major cities to do the same thing. It's bad enough that whenever I'm at LGA or JFK I'm paranoid about people calling the cops on me for walking around with a camera. I believe that this is the beginning of the end of spotting in the USA. Does anyone remember the movie "The Running Man"? We're almost there.

Just my opinion.......

Is this just the borough of Manhattan?

Here is the New York Times Story from June.... Ms. Cho says a lot, but there is ZERO to back up her reassurances.... Note the monkey behavior of the city in the last couple of paragraphs relating to the photographer in question. City has BIG grapefruit balls really to be blaming the ACLU in this case....


By RAY RIVERA
Published: June 29, 2007
Some tourists, amateur photographers, even would-be filmmakers hoping to make it big on YouTube could soon be forced to obtain a city permit and $1 million in liability insurance before taking pictures or filming on city property, including sidewalks.

New rules being considered by the Mayor’s Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting would require any group of two or more people who want to use a camera in a single public location for more than a half hour to get a city permit and insurance.

The same requirements would apply to any group of five or more people who plan to use a tripod in a public location for more than 10 minutes, including the time it takes to set up the equipment.

Julianne Cho, assistant commissioner of the film office, said the rules were not intended to apply to families on vacation or amateur filmmakers or photographers.

Nevertheless, the New York Civil Liberties Union says the proposed rules, as strictly interpreted, could have that effect. The group also warns that the rules set the stage for selective and perhaps discriminatory enforcement by police.

“These rules will apply to a huge range of casual photography and filming, including tourists taking snapshots and people making short videos for YouTube,” said Christopher Dunn, the group’s associate legal director.

Mr. Dunn suggested that the city deliberately kept the language vague, and that as a result police would have broad discretion in enforcing the rules. In a letter sent to the film office this week, Mr. Dunn said the proposed rules would potentially apply to tourists in places like Times Square, Rockefeller Center or ground zero, “where people routinely congregate for more than half an hour and photograph or film.”

The rule could also apply to people waiting in line to enter the Empire State Building or other tourist attractions.

The rules define a “single site” as any area within 100 feet of where filming begins. Under the rules, the two or more people would not actually have to be filming, but could simply be holding an ordinary camera and talking to each other.

The rules are intended to set standards for professional filmmakers and photographers, said Ms. Cho, assistant commissioner of the film office, but the language of the draft makes no such distinction.

“While the permitting scheme does not distinguish between commercial and other types of filming, we anticipate that these rules will have minimal, if any, impact on tourists and recreational photographers, including those that use tripods,” Ms. Cho said in an e-mail response to questions.

Mr. Dunn said that the civil liberties union asked repeatedly for such a distinction in negotiations on the rules but that city officials refused, ostensibly to avoid creating loopholes that could be exploited by professional filmmakers and photographers.

City officials would not confirm that yesterday. But Mark W. Muschenheim, a lawyer with the city’s law department, which helped draft the rules, said, “There are few instances, if any, where the casual tourist would be affected.”

The film office held a public hearing on the proposed rules yesterday, but no one attended. The only written comments the department received were from the civil liberties group, Ms. Cho said.

Ms. Cho said the office expected to publish a final version of the rules at the end of July. They would go into effect a month later.

The permits would be free and applications could be obtained online, Ms. Cho said. The draft rules say the office could take up to 30 days to issue a permit, but Ms. Cho said she expected that most would be issued within 24 hours.

Mr. Dunn says that in addition to the rules being overreaching, they would also create enforcement problems.

“Your everyday person out there with a camcorder is never going to know about the rules,” Mr. Dunn said. “It completely opens the door to discriminatory enforcement of the permit requirements, and that is of enormous concern to us because the people who are going to get pointed out are the people who have dark skin or who are shooting in certain locations.”

The rules were promulgated as a result of just such a case, Mr. Dunn said.

In May 2005, Rakesh Sharma, an Indian documentary filmmaker, was using a hand-held video camera in Midtown Manhattan when he was detained for several hours and questioned by police.

During his detention, Mr. Sharma was told he was required to have a permit to film on city property. According to a lawsuit, Mr. Sharma sought information about how permits were granted and who was required to have one but found there were no written guidelines. Nonetheless, the film office told him he was required to have a permit, but when he applied, the office refused to grant him one and would not give him a written explanation of its refusal.

As part of a settlement reached in April, the film office agreed to establish written rules for issuing permits. Mr. Sharma could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Mr. Dunn said most of the new rules were reasonable. Notably, someone using a hand-held video camera, as Mr. Sharma was doing, would no longer have to get a permit.

And, here are the new rules.... If a cop wants to bust up a Weekend spotting outing get together at any of the "spotting locations" to found on this site, the party is OVER.... get ready to hear the statement "you need a permit"... and "you have 30 minutes"

http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/downloads/ ... t_regs.pdf

Its all there is black and white....

Enjoy shooting by yourself folks....

Well one good thing, if this law does end up passing, just put tripods on your camera, and you can go in a group 5 and under!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nwafan20

Well one good thing, if this law does end up passing, just put tripods on your camera, and you can go in a group 5 and under!

---

Yes, but don't forget to ask for your permit in advance, and check your crystal ball for prevailing winds to guess the runway configuration and where you will be.

Tom