Right to photograph Federal Buildings

[al olson]

I think that this article from the Washington Post should be of interest to everyone.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fed...?hpid=newswell

Also note the link to

Friday's settlement comes as the National Park Service is also making it easier for small groups to gather at national parks.

I wonder what this means for workshops? Hmmm

[Steve M Hostetter]

I was taking photos of our state capital building at night and I had an officer come up and say hi and asked me about my camera ... Then he said have a good night and left.
steve

[Shen45]

Can this be moved to the Lounge please. American politics is not Large Format photography.

[tbeaman]

Yeah, please do. I'm disappointed those posts got deleted. I love watching people lose their shit over nonsense political ideologies.

As for the subject at hand, I also love stories like this.

[keith english]

It sounds like the ruling on groups in national parks was aimed more at protests and free speech activities, rather than photographers or workshops.

[Jeff Conrad]

The settlement in with the NPS has nothing to do with photographers, though it could be taken as prohibiting requiring a permit for photography that the NPS treat as a "demonstration." (activity intended to or likely to attract a crowd). Such a classification is a bit silly, and some years ago, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals voided a similar law for the US Capitol Grounds; though that case had nothing to do with photography, the law that was voided was apparently the basis for requiring tripod permits. As far as I know, the tripod permit requirement hasn't changed, so as with Mr. Musumeci experience with the FPS, what the law appears to say and what actually happens aren't always the same.

So I don't think this has much to do with us, but I guess every little bit helps.

Legislation that would give a break to small filming crews has been introduced in Congress; it wouldn't affect photographers, and I doubt that anything will come of it in the current session. But it's an idea that seems to have had support for several years, so similar legislation could well be introduced in the next session. If one of the current bills were to pass, fees in some cases could be higher for still photography than for filming involving the same number of people, which makes no sense to me. The proposed changes seem reasonable to me, though I'd like to see the reaction of resource managers. In any event, if either of these bills gains traction, it would seem reasonable to seek at least a similar break for photographers. One approach would be for photographers in the US to contact their elected representatives; an even better approach would be to involve a photographers' organization in the process to ensure that seemingly insignificant changes in wording don't have unintended consequences, as may have happened with Public Law 106-206.

One thing is certain: unless we actively present our case, we're certain to not even be considered. I don't think anyone is out to get us; rather, they're probably unaware that we even exist, as usual.

[tbeaman]

That last point you make is especially important. We should all really keep it in mind.

Care to elaborate further on these proposed laws? I'm too lazy to search, and it would benefit the rest of those reading this.

[Jeff Conrad]

Um, I did elaborate, but the post was deleted ...

I'm waiting for some advice on how (or whether) to proceed from someone who better understands how the inside game is played with such things. If I end up posting something, I'll do it in a new thread because it's really a separate issue that relates to reasonable treatment of photographers rather than a right to photograph. And it doesn't really address Al's question about workshops, which are yet again a slightly different issue.

[reyno bundit]

is it really that bad in the usa today? i like to photograph during vacations, is it against the law to do so now?

[Jeff Conrad]

Reyno, I'm not sure quite to what you refer, but I would say simply that Mr. Musumeci's experience with the FPS was an isolated incident that is hardly representative of what one might ordinarily encounter. Note that he was photographing a protester on federal property, which is a fairly unusual circumstance; moreover, a U.S. District Court held that even there, the actions of the FPS agents were illegal. Having been put on notice, FPS agents in New York or elsewhere who are so foolish as to repeat such behavior could find themselves in trouble.

Though I'd never say never, it's very unusual for photographers to get hassled like this, so I wouldn't let it cramp your style. Take pictures as you have previously enjoyed