Re: Google Photographs in Public Places and So Do We

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

________________________________________
From: Anthony Citrano [anthony.citrano () gmail com]
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 3:09 PM
To: David Farber
Cc: Samuel.Posten () L-3Com com
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Google Photographs in Public Places and So Do We

David (and hopefully to Samuel & IP, if you'd pass it on):

As I wrote earlier - I don't think I'm wrong (and neither are you,
Samuel.)  But I was probably right for the wrong reasons.

I made a mistake in referring to the Moscone as public property.  As a
photographer, an event producer, a businessperson, and a citizen - I
know better.  I'm sorry.

And yes, a private property owner may basically restrict photography
as they wish.  But Google was not asserting property rights here -
especially sensible as they do not own the Moscone Center (yet).  ;)

Under the law, the owner of the Moscone Center *could* most certainly
ban photography.  I suspect there are times when they do this under
guidance from the event producers they contract with.

But (as Samuel alludes to in his closing) the chances of them doing
that are basically zero.  It's a trade show - and the booth areas are
a place where your goods are supposed to be *on public display.*
Almost everybody there would be delighted to have their booth
photographed, and I'd wager that any attempt to bar photography on the
show floor at the Web 2.0 Expo would go over like a lead zeppelin.

My point was that the Google booth personnel were being stupid, that
no such policy was in fact in place, and they were wrong to tell
photographers we could not photograph the booth.  They just cannot
claim a "reasonable expectation of privacy."

It's a little bit like the cat on the windowsill in the New York Times
story - yes, the cat is on private property, but it's clearly visible
from a public place.  The Google booth seems to me to be (legally)
somewhat similarly situated - it is erected in a space open to the
public where they know photography is permitted.  Setting aside the PR
and marketing blunder of it all, how can they legitimately assert a
"reasonable expectation of privacy"?

There's still way too much baseless paranoid anti-photographer
sentiment in the air, and I've been at the receiving end of it a few
times (most notably, as some of you'll remember, when I was nearly
assaulted in San Antonio by a Sheriff's deputy last spring.)  It irks
me greatly, I want it to end, and so I probably have a hair trigger
about such things.

I updated the post immediately after Google clarified the "policy" -
an hour or so after some of us called them out:

http://www.cosmictap.com/google-photographs-in-public-places-and-so-do-we/

For those of you who don't get a chance to read it: within a very
short time Google contacted us and told us that, as we predicted,
booth personnel were wrong and we were free to photograph the booth.

In closing - I have friends at Google and I think they are (overall) a
bunch of smart, good human beings.  Someone at the booth made a
mistake.  We called them out.  They fixed it.  I forgive them.

best
-a

--
anthony citrano
www.citrano.com

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:57 AM, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:
>  ________________________________________
>  From: Samuel.Posten () L-3Com com [Samuel.Posten () L-3Com com]
>  Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 11:35 AM
>  To: David Farber
>  Subject: RE: [IP] Google Photographs in Public Places and So Do We
>
>  Dave, I'm not a lawyer but I've been dealing with similar issues lately.  This guy is wrong.  He's at a trade show 
> on private property.  The organizers are perfectly within their rights to restrict photography.  They'd probably be 
> stupid and unsuccessful, but within their rights.
>
>
>
>  -------------------------------------------
>  Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
>  RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
>  Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com