Community NEWS

[Gustavo]

This is specifically an email for those photographers and models who are living in the United
States. We all need to unite against a law that was just passed in August 2007 concerning National
Parks. I've detailed it here:

All photographers here need to complain about a law that was just passed in the legislature that
violates the 1st Amendment of the Constitution concerning photographing in National Parks. I am
asking everyone here to call, write, email (all of that) thier House Representatives and Senators and
complain about:

http://www.fws.gov/policy/library/E7-15845.html

Law - 36 CFR Part 5, Section 5.3 which states (please see the part that concerns "visitors"):
Section 5.3 When do I need a permit for commercial filming or still photography?

Public Law 106-206 augments previous statutes for authorizing commercial filming and still
photography activities and provides protections for the affected Federal lands. The law clarifies the
requirements for commercial filming and still photography permits and establishes limitations for
filming activities. While commercial filming and still photography are activities generally allowed
on Federal lands, in many circumstances it is in the Government's interest to manage the activity
through a permitting process to minimize the possibility of damage to the cultural or natural
resources or interference with other visitors to the area. A person seeking a permit should contact the
manager of the site for which the permit is sought to learn how and where to apply.
All commercial filming on lands under DOI jurisdiction requires a permit. This section details
those instances and lists specific criteria that trigger the need for a still photography permit,
such as the use of models, sets, or props or requesting access to an area to photograph which is, at
that time, not open to the general public. While filming and still photography activities by
visitors (as opposed to commercial filmmakers or commercial photographers) generally do not require a
permit, this section details those instances and lists specific criteria that trigger the need for
a filming or still photography permit. These criteria include the use of models, sets, or props or
requesting access to an area to film or photograph which is, at that time, not open to the
general public. News coverage also does not need a permit, but is subject to time, place, and manner
restriction, if warranted, to maintain order and ensure the safety of the public and the media, and
protect na!
tural and cultural resources.
---------

You can look up your House representative by using this link:

http://whoismyrepresentative.com/

And you can find your Senator here:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

Topics to hit on:

I was photographing a friend and was asked to stop.

I was asked for 1 million dollars in liability insurance to photograph my friend.

I was threatened with having my film gear and my film confiscated.

I was asked to apply for a permit.

What constitutes a "model?" What constitutes "props?"

Why are artists being targeted?

----------

Thank you in advance for being united against this law that violates our 1st Amendment. Numbers
matter... the more calls our Representatives and Senators receive the faster we are on their minds.

Sincerely,

Zoe Wiseman

[Brian Ellis]

You're citing a proposed regulation (CFR stands for "Code of Federal Regulations"), not a law. The regulations are being proposed to implement a law that's already in place. So if you have a problem with the regulations the place to comment isn't to Senators or Representatives because they liked the law well enough to enact it and they aren't the ones writing these regulations. Proposed federal regulations always include instructions for where and how to comment on them so such instructions must be somewhere in these regulations, probably near the end. You could of course write to your Senator or Representative and try to get the law itself (not these regulations) repealed but that isn't easy to do for obvious reasons, especially if the law in question was only recently enacted.

[Gustavo]

That me be ,my concern is that this will get out of hand as it is now It has increasingly frustrating to shoot in city's and parks with out some goon coming up and hurasing me as i try to expose a plate I am an artist not an advertising agent or Hollywood s..head
I try not to disturb what I photograph and jet the government has to interfere on my work and tell me what and how I should proceed ...

[David A. Goldfarb]

The regulations for city parks are usually different from the regulations for federal lands and National Parks.

[Robert Brummitt]

If I read this correct, the propose law is for "Commercial" endeavors. Not for the lowly fine art photographer. The Feds are looking for a piece of the action. They figure if you are doing a business job then you should pay for the use of the land.
If you're just ordinary, one of the mill photographer, who doesn't earn anything or low amount of money. They're not going to be too interested in you.
But, then one never knows?