I get what you are saying. We would be more compared to a reservation only restaurant or one that you are only allowed up front until you are guided to your seat.
I think you misunderstand me. Publishing photos of another’s intellectual property without permission is illegal under copyright law, but given the fact that the building is already under video surveillance, there is no reasonable expectation that one wouldn’t be photographed. I would still ask permission before taking pictures of someone else’s work, but if it weren’t published it wouldn’t be a crime. There being limited rules regarding photography in the space, I think that is where things stand. I welcome clear rules regarding photography in the Space and would happily abide by them.
I think in lieu of a written policy it’s simply ask someone to stop if you don’t want a photo of yourself taken. Atleast in a wide angle shot that includes more than just one person and their work.
There is nothing stopping people from taking photos of glue ups or things on project shelves or in the display cabinet or on the walls.
Could be wrong about that though
Yeah, I’m definitely going to say “Scram” the next time I see a camera pointed my way. I am definitely unappreciative of random dudes meandering around filming whatever.
What tipped it over for me, and I think that this is still a spot where it’s on the photographer to ask, was when the dude wandered up into our work area and got super-close (less than 6") to our work-in-progress, He was so close to the work that I had to really push my hand under the camera so that my tapping fingers were also part of his shot.
Sure, and I think there is a different understanding when it’s a shot of someone and their work versus a shot of the general environment. That’s rude to do without asking and super rude in the middle of the class. Although I’d probably also say that perhaps just asking him to stop is better than the tapping.
The problem is, we are always going to have people who don’t know whatever rule is decided upon. Or people that forget or whatever. Most of the people I see taking photos of individuals do ask out of courtesy. I’d hope that whoever that was was an exception. Perhaps if we make a rule it needs to specify a difference between types of subject matter (e.g., taking a photo of as much of the workshop as you can versus zooming in on one individual and their work)
I don’t think this is a situation where any rules need to change. Even if we make a rule it will be buried in a mountain of rules that no one reads anyhow.
Anyone who’s carried around a camera in public knows people act differently in front of it, and MANY people absolutely resent having their photo taken regardless of the context.
IME most don’t mind being in the background, but taking photos where people and their belongings are the main focus is downright intrusive and perhaps that lil slice of etiquette should be covered in the photography classes since apparently it’s not common sense.
I always ask, and I ask if I can post the pictures. I should ask too if I can give attribution. It’s not hard.
It isn’t an issue until someone gets really annoyed on one side or another and starts the legal charades !!!
Legally “public” doesn’t simply mean the public can get there unfettered. It has a more restrictive definition.
The LifeHacker article talks about legally public places, which is completely different even from say a restaurant. Typically they simply don’t care, but I guarantee if you wandered in with a professional looking camera and started filming things would go south very quickly.
I have read the LifaHacker article a few times in the past and believe it is simply wrong. If someone is on property under your jurisdiction (for want of a better term) then you have COMPLETE control over who can do what on that property. You don’t have to tell them. If someone steps on your property to get a better picture of your flower bed, then they are breaking multiple laws including trespassing and technically copyright infringement if you didn’t give them explicit permission to take pictures ‘from your property’
In DMS’s case that would be the BoD.
Well, I’m not going to vouch for LifeHacker on a legal standpoint because I am not a lawyer but I will say that the direct quote I posted in my comment from that article was about restaurants.
If you invite people on to your property for say a gathering or class and not tell them “no photography” because you don’t feel you have to, then proceed to try and charge them with trespassing and copyright infringement for taking a selfy next to your prized flower bed, I’d say you are going to have a rough time in court.
Uh, no, you don’t.
I didn’t say if you would invite them on, then prosecute them. Having said that, even if you DO invite them onto your property, then ASK them to stop taking pictures, and they continue, then there is no legal difficulty at all…
Obviously if you invite someone onto your property you cant prosecute for trespassing, but if you later ask them to leave and they don’t THEN you can. The reason for leaving can be anything you want… it is your property.
Uh… OK then !!! Try that on my property and see how it works out for you…
Tell you what. Come trick-or-treating at my house. When you step onto my property, and I pick up that COMPLETE CONTROL, I have some chores for you to do. You have to do them, because I have COMPLETE CONTROL, yes?
If you ask me to leave and I don’t, then you can have me arrested!!!
I didn’t say you can make people do what you want, I said you have complete control over what I allow you to do on my property. Read what I wrote… If I don’t like the noise you make when you fart and ask you to leave… I can. I can’t make you mow my lawn.
If you say “If you don’t do my chores then you have to leave my property” then absolutely correct!!!
That doesn’t sound like COMPLETE CONTROL to me.
The issue being discussed is at DMS.
Complete control over what is allowed. Sound better???
Whilst the conversation does seem to have gone off the rails abit, I think it is still relevant to DMS since it is about what people legally can and cannot do on other people’s property with/without explicit permission.
DMS has the right to determine what members and guests are allowed and not allowed to do on their property, e.g. take pictures in this specific instance. THIS is the crux of the discussion.
DMS needs to make it clear, I think, to both members and guests if taking pictures is or is not allowed, and under what conditions if yes.
If yes then members also need to be aware that there is no expectation of privacy of projects under those conditions (and certainly no expectations that their patent idea is safe under ANY conditions).
The only reason I say this is that it obviously HAS become an issue for some members.