Re: [Leica] Cops run amok

["Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>]

Eric,

For freedom of speech to apply, the actual act of taking the picture would
have to be held to be expressive conduct and even if it were so held, it
would receive less protection than "pure speech." This is an interesting
question. Displaying a photograph would more likely be found to be an
expressive act of "speech," but I'm not sure about the taking of the shot.

As to the second part of your post, do you mean the Fourth Amendment instead
of the Fifth? If you're referring to the due process clause of the Fifth,
that applies to federal action. The right to due process from state or local
action is found in the Fourteenth, although this distinction is largely
academic.

I suppose that under a due process analysis if a camera were taken and
returned the owner might technically be able to claim damages in the amount
of the rental value of the camera, but in the real world I don't think
they'd get very far trying to make this claim.

BTW, I've always been pretty much an absolutist concerning the right to
photograph, but I had an interesting experience about a year and a half ago.
On a flight from Tokyo to Los Angeles I was bumped into first class by the
airline because I had been bumped off my originally booked flight. So, I
found myself not only in unusual luxury (by my standards) but also
travelling with a fairly famous rock and roll band (suffice to say that the
drummer had not yet gone to jail for trouble with his Baywatch-actress
wife). When we got to LAX after a 10+ hour flight, we were immediately
beseiged by luggage handlers and airline/airport employees who get kickbacks
from photographers for tipping them off that celebrities have just arrived.
As we went through baggage-claim and customs, these "scouts" got more and
more obnoxious. Then, the photographers showed up. It seems that the "thing"
now is not just to take pictures of celebrities, but to try and provoke them
into taking some sort of action against you. A picture of someone famous
swinging at you is worth more than just a picture of someone famous. I
really felt ashamed to be carrying a camera bag. And yet, all of this was
happening in a "public" location. The interesting thing was that there had
been photographers at the airport in Tokyo too. But there they had been
polite and respectfull. And, the guys in the band were only too happy to
cooperate with them and pose for a few pictures.

Bryan
- -----Original Message-----
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Cops run amok


>At 06:01 PM 4/8/99 -0700, you wrote:
>>While I wholeheartedly sympathize, I'm not sure it's the First Amendment
>>that protects private individuals from taking a photograph,
>
>Freedom of speech, for one. It certainly isn't freedom of the press. But on
>one's own property, the fifth amendment would have sufficed, I would think.
>But not against Nazis. :-)
>
>Eric Welch
>St. Joseph, MO
>http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch
>
>I disagree with unanimity.
>