Photography Law
There are 4.3 million CCTV cameras spying on us here in the UK. That’s 20% of the worlds CCTV cameras, or to put it another way, 1 for every 14 residents. The average citizen is caught on camera 300 times a day.
Somehow we’ve allowed ourselves to be photographed more than any other country in the world, and to add insult to injury, we are questioned in great detail by police and security guards when we want to take our own photographs of landmarks, buildings and even our own homes.
We’re told it’s to prevent terrorism, but I would love to hear a reasoned and rational explanation as to how and when a camera was used in terrorism, and how preventing them from doing so would have changed the inevitable outcome.
And to be honest, even if these “terrographers” do use photos, so what? I imagine they use cars, computers, phones, and electricity. That makes pretty much everyone open to questioning. Right?
Besides, we all should know by now that you are far more likely to die of some more mundane reason like choking on a cheeseburger or being mowed down by a drunk driver. Terrorism is only scary because it has potential to be so much worse, but with a little perspective, you realise we just need to get on with our lives and stop living in fear.
We’re giving up more and more of our civil rights every day in the name of prevention of terrorism. Hell, I’m probably being flagged on a national database right now for writing this blog post. But I’ll let you into a little secret: there are two reasons why photographers are being harrassed and neither have anything to do with terrorism.
- Money & corporate greed.
- Fear & government control.
God, I’m really starting to sound like one of those conspiracy nutjobs.
I think you’d agree though, most good things are eventually spoiled by a greed for more money, particularly in the UK.
If you take a photo of a building or landmark, and then sell that to a stock library or other commercial entity, you are depriving the owners of that building of a potential source of income. This is why security guards are instructed to prevent people who “look pro”.
“Looking pro” comes down to four basic factors.
- Using an SLR camera.
- Having big glass.
- Using or carrying a tripod.
- Using pretentious words like “glass” instead of “lens”.
If you’re an serious amateur photographer (and there’s an awful lot of us), you can hardly avoid the first three points. The police will tell you a tripod creates a “health & safety” risk of people tripping. While that’s a valid point in a busy area, there are plenty of situations where a tripod can be used safely and represent no risk whatsoever. Besides, most of the people I know who have been stopped by police (including myself) weren’t even using or carrying a tripod.
Intimidating photographers not only makes the police feel good about themselves, like they are making some sort of difference, but it also gives the rest of us a nice reminder about the threat of terrorism.
Fear in the population is good. It eases the introduction of new laws such as America’s PATRIOT Act and the UK’s RIP Act.
Not a photographer? That changes nothing. This issue extends way beyond photographers rights into areas you do care about.
Drive a car? You should expect to be have your number plate photographed wherever you go. These cameras are currently used to track criminals, enforce congestion charging and monitor traffic flow. How long until the data can be used by private firms like insurance companies?
Maybe you’ve been on a plane recently? Then you already know what it’s like to be treated like a criminal.
If you use the internet, everything you do online is logged and accountable to you.
Or maybe you carry a mobile phone. Your movements can be tracked, every call and text logged, as well as an ability to remotely activate the microphone in your phone to listen in on you, even if your phone is switched off.
It’s amazing how quickly we all get used to this stuff.
Anyway, back to my point.
I think it’s time that photographers stand together and establish once and for all, what our rights actually are. With that in mind, I have submitted a petition on the UK Government website, requesting a specific answer to this issue.
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to clarify the laws surrounding photography in public places.
Through history, we have documented the world around us, whether through written word, art or photography.
Photography in particular has provided fantastic insights into the past and present, and is a hobby enjoyed by millions of people worldwide.
But today, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to take photos of our surroundings, particularly in cities like London.
In recent years, the price divide between professional and consumer equipment has blurred, and it’s quite common these days to see amateurs and hobbyists carrying around tripods, SLR cameras and a backpack full of equipment.
Yet, we are constantly harrassed by security guards and police officers in the name of preventing terrorism. They seem to be operating under a different interpretation of the law to the rest of us, believing that somehow the length of your lens, or size of your camera is relevant.
We would like clarification by the goverment on the law regarding photography of buildings and landmarks from public locations.
The petition can be found here, and I encourage anyone who has ever taken a photograph to sign it.