The rules would cover any public place in the city of New York, including sidewalks. A spokesperson from the mayors office said the rules are not intended to apply to families and tourists, but who is to say who is a family and who is a tourist?
]]> From the New York Times:"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 [New York Civil Liberties Union ] associate legal director.Under the rules, the people would not have to be actually filming, just holding a camera and talking to each other.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."
City May Seek Permit and Insurance for Many Kinds of Public Photography [NYT via digg]
(Photo: Meghann Marco)
Of course protesters could just "pass" the camera but if you have had ANY experience with the NYPD it's more likely they will pass the baton.
I bet if you were to take the pulse of the "body" of America...that freedom beat is very faint.
]]>I blogged this, because I'm not sure how it will affect people like me, who like to take random pictures or pictures to be "artsy," and my friends who are professional photographers and who are amateur photographers who spend more time at it than I am.
I join @loquaciousmusic:
Before I started reading Consumerist, I would probably think, "Why the hell would someone be taking a photo in a grocery store?"
Now I take my digital camera everywhere... I need to post local farm pictures that I took last weekend, including the outhouse with the American flag (the company's advertising, not the farm's).
]]>Before I started reading Consumerist, I would probably think, "Why the hell would someone be taking a photo in a grocery store?"
Now I take my digital camera everywhere, just in case I catch something hinky going on.
Is this evolution or consumerism?
]]>I'm sure they don't, but the NYPD is certainly empowered to arrest people in violation of the law.
"When I was in a college video class, it was explained to us that student/amateur films did not need a permit to shoot in NYC..."
Yeah, that was then. This is now.
May I politely ask what "problem" this law is supposed to fix? I'm from NYC and I've never seen the streets clogged with camera crews.
What it is, is more fascist shit designed to prevent protesters from documenting abuse by police as happened at the last Republican convention.
]]>What the hell are you talking about? Forget your reading comprehension somewhere?
]]>B, that's not the problem. The length of the film doesn't have to be 30 minutes - it's the PROCESS of filming. If you stay in one general area for 30 minutes or more in the process of taking photographs or shooting film, you're in violation.
This definitely sounds like it's a back-door way for arresting and fining protesters. If you have a camera and you stay at a march more than 29 minutes, then NYC could potentially prosecute you. And don't think for a second they won't selectively use this ability.
]]>I was lucky enough to not be a "victim" of that, but I know a few friends who can't say the same.
I think this rule is well intentioned, as certainly some moviemakers will opt to use a small two men groups or whatnot to portray certain intimacy in the film's scenes and who's to say accidents won't happen? But, if the rule is as vaguely worded as charged, then I share Mr. Dunn's skepticism. You can bet your @ss that it will be misused, when the next budget problems roll around
]]>Do you really, honestly believe this won't be abused? Can you say in all seriousness that you see no potential for abuse here, and that nobody will abuse it ever?
]]>FTA: "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."
I think they are reading WAY WAY too much into this.
The film office does not have an "enforcement" division that roams the streets looking for people with cameras to fine. When I was in a college video class, it was explained to us that student/amateur films did not need a permit to shoot in NYC, HOWEVER if your shoot caused a disturbance (ie. noise complaints, screwing up traffic on a street, trespassing onto private property) expect a fine.
]]>Not to mention, say goodbye to ANY footage that might record a protest or police activity. This is scary s#it people! Why is it the govt. can place cameras all over the cities to identify and track people, yet We the People would be criminals for recording our own point of view? Where's the outrage to this?? How far is too far??!!
]]>
]]>