Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: OT ! a naked exposure
From: scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin)
Date: Sat Jan 8 11:44:40 2005
References: <41DE7309.9000102@cox.net> <5o80u0dur6ijgpod9hol6nuub0tkm1p220@4ax.com> <94AA6D16-61A9-11D9-A6F6-0050E42E6E0B@shaw.ca>

I simply don't shop there. I once bought some camping equipment, found
the store exceedingly seedy and depressing, and have otherwise never
returned.  All my $$ goes to specialty stores and the occasional Nordstrom
visit. Works for me.

Scott

John Collier wrote:

> All he would have to do is show one of Walmart's ads inviting people 
> to come on down for cheap tube socks. He would then be there on 
> Walmart's invitation. He still could be prohibited from photographing 
> but he couldn't be charged with trespassing.
>
> Mind you I don't actually look at Walmart ads. Perhaps they list all 
> the people they don't want to come on down; or, maybe a general clause 
> on restraining orders.
>
> :-)
>
> John Collier
>
> On Jan 8, 2005, at 11:19 AM, Eric wrote:
>
>> Why?  I don't see how Wal-mart is in the wrong.
>>
>> A guy takes a photograph on somebody else's property.  The owners of the
>> property says they don't like photographs being taken without prior
>> permission, and that if the photographer doesn't want to hand over the
>> photo, he isn't welcome back.  If he comes back, he would be legally
>> trespassing.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] OT ! a naked exposure)
Message from ericm at pobox.com (Eric) ([Leica] Re: OT ! a naked exposure)
Message from jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier) ([Leica] Re: OT ! a naked exposure)