Photography in public (Ireland only)

cozski

Hey, I'm pretty sure there was a thread about the legalities of taking pictures in public places, particularly the issue of beiong stopped and questioned by the police.... but I can't for the life of me find it....

Anyone point me to it?
Thanks.

DaireQuinlan

http://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?forum=27&sort=newest&date_to=&date_from=&query=public+photography

cozski

Thanks.... did you do this by searching the Photography Board or all of Boards?

DaireQuinlan

cozski wrote: »

Thanks.... did you do this by searching the Photography Board or all of Boards?

It's a 'newest first' search just on the photography forum with the query "public photography"

cozski

Ah okay. probably why I wasn't getting much success.... cheers.

Corkbah

long and short of it is ... its perfectly legal to photograph someone in public - the image cannot be used for commercial purposes (i.e. advertising).

there is an exception to usage of an image if there is a reasonable right/expectation of privacy ...but that doesn't mean you cant take the image....just means it cannot be used ...ever !

cozski

Thank for that Corkbah....

I ask because I've been spending time on and off around Tallght and in particular those buildings which have 24 hr securtiy patrolling around them because they're empty and presumabling at risk from a range of things.... but I love the fact that they'e all just big empty buildings and they make for some great photography.

Unfortunatlety the securuity guys seem to have a mixed opinion about whehter it's alright for me to photograph the buildings, so just getting some relevant info on it for next time.... and any other similar situations.

Corkbah

if they are empty buildings with security ... chances are the buildings are owned by someone so ... photographing inside the buildings could only be done with permission, but photographing the buildings themselves may or may not require permission....grey area.... cant remember what its all about but something about the image rights of the building or if its a listed building....I dont know.

the lads over in the legal discussions section could point you in the right direction.

Zillah

cozski wrote: »

Thank for that Corkbah....

I ask because I've been spending time on and off around Tallght and in particular those buildings which have 24 hr securtiy patrolling around them because they're empty and presumabling at risk from a range of things.... but I love the fact that they'e all just big empty buildings and they make for some great photography.

Unfortunatlety the securuity guys seem to have a mixed opinion about whehter it's alright for me to photograph the buildings, so just getting some relevant info on it for next time.... and any other similar situations.

If you are standing on public property when you are taking the photo then they can no more forbid you from taking the photos than they can punch you in the face. They're probably just bored. If you are standing on an area of private property, even if it looks like a public street (which could very well be the case if it is on a private lot) then you are obliged to stopped taking photos if they instruct you to.

If you're in the right you can take two approaches: Pretend like their opinion matters, assure them you mean no harm and convince them to leave you alone, or, tell them in no uncertain terms that you are legally entitled to take the photos and their opinion doesn't matter. It really depends on your mood

cozski

Thanks for that.... the area is public.... it's just where Lidl is across from the Square.... there's an empty hotel there and a nunmber of empty apartments. Generally I do say that as I'm on public property I'm not doing anything illegal and that if they have real concerns then they are welcome to give the police a call. It's never come to that and generally they seem more content in making some spurrious claim/comment.... it's just that the guys change so often that you can meet a different bunch of people every rtime you go up and go througg the same conversation. It's no fun doing that job, especially in all weathers because for the most part they are just ambling around outside. One of them told me that the bank(s) are paying 24,000 a week just for security in that area.

Corkbah

if the bank(s) dont pay the money the place could be vandalised and the value of the property could drop by substantially more than €24K a week, it could (in theory) be reduced to a shell which is in need of being pulled down...which would cost a hell of a lot more to replace.

as regards getting permission to photograph inside.... you would need permission as its more about liability issue - incase you trip/fall or the building collapses on you .... they are not insured.

Rew

Ring the security company and ask them to stop their staff from harassing you, job done.

melekalikimaka

depends, are you on a public road argueing this or inside the premise, if its a apt complex, the paths might no me public around it

cozski

Corkbah wrote: »

if the bank(s) dont pay the money the place could be vandalised and the value of the property could drop by substantially more than €24K a week, it could (in theory) be reduced to a shell which is in need of being pulled down...which would cost a hell of a lot more to replace.

Yeah, kinda makes sense.... although I'd be very suprised if there is any significant use of these buildings in the next 5 years.

as regards getting permission to photograph inside.... you would need permission as its more about liability issue - incase you trip/fall or the building collapses on you .... they are not insured.

I'm not looking to photograph inside.... although one of the security guards told me they had been using some of the rooms in one of the buildings to shoot for that programme about drug gangs in Ireland, which I don't watch but hear is pretty gritty.

cozski

Rew wrote: »

Ring the security company and ask them to stop their staff from harassing you, job done.

In fairness it's only amounted to a couple of fairly protracted conversations but I'm hoping I can reduce that by handing them something that outlines my rights.... they read it, shrug and walk off.... is the hope.

cozski

melekalikimaka wrote: »

depends, are you on a public road argueing this or inside the premise, if its a apt complex, the paths might no me public around it

I've never been in the buildings..... just outside on the street/forecourt.

melekalikimaka

cozski wrote: »

I've never been in the buildings..... just outside on the street/forecourt.

the forecourt could be private... 'could'

cozski

melekalikimaka wrote: »

the forecourt could be private... 'could'

Myabe forecourt is not the right word. The area can be seen here which are basically the streets between the buildings. One of the Public Art pieces can be seen here which I'm sure is not in a private square. Could be wrong though.

Effects

Where that sculpture is located looks like it could be private land. Even though it can be accessed easily.

andy_g

Effects wrote: »

Where that sculpture is located looks like it could be private land. Even though it can be accessed easily.

Yeah that square is all private land.

Gumbo

cozski wrote: »

Myabe forecourt is not the right word. The area can be seen here which are basically the streets between the buildings. One of the Public Art pieces can be seen here which I'm sure is not in a private square. Could be wrong though.

My guess would be that everything in the view is private land. Everything bounded by the new builds would be for sure. You would have to check for public right of way or records of the land owners handing over the land for public use, but beware that the owners can handover the land for use as a public right of way but still own the land and hence remain private.

cozski

kceire wrote: »

My guess would be that everything in the view is private land. Everything bounded by the new builds would be for sure. You would have to check for public right of way or records of the land owners handing over the land for public use, but beware that the owners can handover the land for use as a public right of way but still own the land and hence remain private.

I'l certainly check it out more thoroughly with the right authorities. Cheers for your comments.