Re: Photography and the Law

On Thu, 8 May 2008 19:14:02 +0100, "MC" <qwert@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>You can "snap away" until said patrons complain to the proprietor who may

>tell the photographer to stop.  It is also possible the proprietor could 
>even offer the complainer the option to leave the premises if they do not

>like the chance of ending up in a photo.  Best thing is to approach the 
>proprietor and ask permission.  They may give permission with strings
(i.e. 
>no people photos) of they may just let you get on with whatever you want.

>Best to ask all the same.

I disagree.  If something is not expressly forbidden, then IMO it is
*never* a good idea to ask for permission.  Asking for permission does
3 things.  
	1) It informs the person you are asking that you believe they
have the power to prohibit the activity and will not complain if they
do so and 
	2) it forces them to make an immediate go/no-go decision and 
	3) it removes the possibility of the person "turning a blind
eye" in the event that there is a prohibition policy in place.

When faced with making a decision, most people will make a decision
that they believe is least likely to result in negative consequences
for themselves.  Prohibiting an activity is usually less likely to
rebound than saying "yes".

My suggestion therefore is that you carry out any activity that you
have no reason to believe is either prohibited or is likely to cause
significant annoyance to other people.  If an official tells you to
stop, then stop.

-- 
Cynic