nytimes.com — 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.
Jun 29, 2007 View in Crawl 4
smokecheckJun 29, 2007
cough-cough-Bulls**t
khfnJun 29, 2007
Hmm, duh, this is obviously meant to combat protestors who want to protect themselves from lawlessness.Uh, am I a thought criminal now? *cries* *hides under bed* *foreal*
sweetskye82Jun 30, 2007
They aren't banning cameras... read the article wouldja? They just want groups of 2 people or more to have a permit to shoot, that's all... not really even that big of a deal. The article also said that tourists probably won't even be bothered by it.
akufenJun 30, 2007
It's not meant to "work".It's just another way to control what the public gets to see. Filming activists to show the internet that there's reason to worry will be a lot tougher than filming your kids in the park. Or they can just deny you a license if they know you have anything to do with peace activists, 9/11 truth, or anything they don't like.
Closed AccountJul 1, 2007
"Did anyone actually read what you need a permit for?"Yep, trying to exercise your first amendment rights to a free press.
luthienrisingJul 1, 2007
If there's one of you and your equipment is handheld, this regulation exempts you for any length of time at all. If there's one of you with a tripod, you're exempt. If there's five of you with a tripod, you're exempt up to 10 minutes. If there's two of you with a tripod/lighting/whatever, you're exempt up to half an hour. If you're shooting a public demonstration, parade, etc., you're exempt. These are outlined in the proposals, which maybe people ought to actually read before claiming photography is being banned. The limitations are designed around what sort of activity obstructs public use of public space. And personally, as someone whose street corner is often used for filming, from very small scale to very large, that makes a lot of sense. If we started getting all sorts of new filming that wasn't covered under the current permit system, I'd be starting to complain too -- it's kind of nice to be able to actually have some notice when people are going to be making it hard to get in and out of your own house, and to have a break from it. And we've got just a fraction of the amount of filming that happens in NYC. And no, I'm not an anti-liberty fascist who wants to trample on everyone's rights; I'm a photographer too. But I also have a right, as a pedestrian, to use the public sidewalks, unobstructed.
mikethecJul 2, 2007
This is utter bulls**t. Guess I won't be giving NYC any my tourist dollars. I hope Stallman adds this to his web site.
luthienrisingOct 29, 2007
update: <a class="user" href="http://www.pdnpulse.com/2007/10/nyc-tries-again.html">http://www.pdnpulse.com/2007/10/nyc-tries-again.ht ...</a>
luthienrisingOct 29, 2007
Dugg here: <a class="user" href="http://digg.com/world_news/NYC_unveils_revised_filming_permit_proposal">http://digg.com/world_news/NYC_unveils_revised_fil ...</a>