City May Seek Permit, Insurance for Public Photography at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The DV Info Network > Digital Video Industry News

Digital Video Industry News
Events, press releases, bulletins and dispatches from the DV world at large.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 29th, 2007, 08:58 AM   #1
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albany, NY 12210
Posts: 2,650
City May Seek Permit, Insurance for Public Photography

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/ny...gewanted=print
Marco Leavitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2007, 09:50 AM   #2
Obstreperous Rex
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: San Marcos, TX
Posts: 26,900
Images: 513
Thread title changed to reflect the topic of the link.

Please avoid using reactionary or inflammatory descriptions in the thread title field. If you have an issue with that particular topic, please follow up and explain how you feel about it and why.

We tend to remove one-line outbursts... we're interested instead in calm, polite, civil, rational discourse on a professional level (that's directed at everyone reading this, not just the original poster). Thanks in advance,
__________________
CH

Search DV Info Net | DV Info Net Sponsors | A Decade (+5) of DVi | ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!
Chris Hurd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2007, 09:53 AM   #3
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albany, NY 12210
Posts: 2,650
Sorry! I figured the article would pretty much speak for itself.
Marco Leavitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2007, 12:58 PM   #4
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 315
Wow... What a depressing and outrageous article. And people wonder why film makers are going outside the USA to make their films. By the time you're done cutting through all the red tape, you won't have a budget left to produce your film. Is it just me, or do permits like this exist for the sole purpose of deterring and frustrating law-abiding, legitimate photographers? Seems to me that something like this wouldn't stop someone with a more sinister plan, but then again, most people just roll their eyes at me and tell me that I don't get "the big picture"...

Thanks for posting the link. Now I'll be sure to never go to NYC!
Shawn McCalip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2007, 01:11 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 475
I jsut love (sarcasm intended) how the film office keeps repeating the mantra that it will not be applied to the tourist, casual or amatuer filmmaker. But the way the law is worded any beat cop could apply it to any 12 year old kid with a camcorder. Then they can go broke proving their innocence.

in-credible. Don't write specific laws, rather write them generic so the lawyers and courts can sort it out on the accused's dime.
Bill Mecca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2007, 01:32 PM   #6
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albany, NY 12210
Posts: 2,650
The permit issue doesn't seem like a big deal, but requiring insurance? That's a big hurdle for the vast majority of people. I don't know what it has to do with security, which I presume is the reason for this.
Marco Leavitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2007, 03:14 PM   #7
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,777
Another story (New York 1 News - Cable) on the issue.

http://www.ny1news.com/ny1/content/i...id=1&aid=71235
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2007, 08:50 AM   #8
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,777
This will seriously hurt my business. I shoot Reporter Demo Reels. Many of my clients are now on the air, even though they had no previous on air experience.

Shooting such demo news stories requires access to the public sidewalks, use of a tripod, being in a location more than 10 minutes.

On permits - I wouldn't mind if I were required an "open ended" permit with a press like badge to shoot in the city but requiring a permit per shoot when locations are often decided on short notice is simply not viable.

The need for insurance would drive up my rates such that my clients, ranging from communications majors out of college to those in page programs or PAs, would simply not be able to afford to do this.
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2nd, 2007, 06:14 PM   #9
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Summit, NJ
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mecca View Post

in-credible. Don't write specific laws, rather write them generic so the lawyers and courts can sort it out on the accused's dime.
Sometimes I wonder if it's not intentional. Could the city be using this as a cash cow?

Last edited by Adam Palomer; July 2nd, 2007 at 06:57 PM.
Adam Palomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3rd, 2007, 10:28 PM   #10
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Posts: 7
"the Mayor’s Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting would require any group of two or more people who want to use a camera in a single public location for more than a half hour to get a city permit and insurance."

This means any news team covering a major news story (i.e. a large building fire) would have to obtain a permit before going to the site...if this were interpreted strictly.

Either they are an exception to the rule somewhere in the bill or permits would be made for an available period of time say a month, or a quarter, or a year.

Anyone know? Did I miss something?
Kurt Copeland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2007, 07:35 AM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Ca USA
Posts: 542
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Seeman View Post
On permits - I wouldn't mind if I were required an "open ended" permit with a press like badge to shoot in the city but requiring a permit per shoot when locations are often decided on short notice is simply not viable.
This is exactly right. Advance disclosure of locations a production would be shooting via email would help as well. A cop could look at your "open ended" badge number, see that you have advance notified the system of where you will be shooting and for what time duration, lol, and then leave you alone.

That actually could be very helpful in the event your location shoot noticed odd activity but didn't bother to report it. The police could backtrack a crime and if they notice a production was in the area at the time they might actually pick up some clues for their own investigation.

Becomes a win win at that point. As for insurance, all production companies should carry at least a 1 million dollar liability insurance policy.
Alessandro Machi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2007, 08:50 AM   #12
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Belfast, UK
Posts: 4,120
In the UK. many freelance technicians carry third party insurance. One of the best deals here is the cheap third party insurance policy that BECTU, the film & TV union can provide. Also, if you employ people you also need employers insurance.

Given the litigious society in the US, professionals would be crazy not to have third party insurance. You can get a policy for a year and spread the costs and $1m is pretty minimal coverage.
Brian Drysdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2007, 10:34 AM   #13
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Posts: 7
Concerning the one million in insurance, this was years ago, but, I used to have one million dollars mandatory liability insurance as a PADI certified diving instructor and it only cost $99 per year!

I'm sure that price has come and gone, but, it shouldn't be TOO expensive.
Kurt Copeland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2007, 04:16 PM   #14
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 43
Not to long ago, I had a shoot scheduled for Central Park and needed to obtain permission from the Parks Department along with the Mayor's Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting. The Parks Department gave me immediate permission via an exchange of e-mails and then directed me to get a permit from the Mayor's Office. Although I have videographer's insurance from the Traveler's which provided a certificate of liability to the Mayor's Office, my application was rejected because the certificate did not contain the language required by the City. My broker said the language required by the City was unreasonable and implied that they were a party to the contract. I wrote to the Mayor's Office asking for a review of the matter, but never received a written reply. After making a follow-up request to the Public Advocate's office, I received a polite call from Corporation Counsel (the City's attorneys) and was referred back to a person in the Mayor's Office of Film, but never received a reply from him. Even though I have liability insurance from a major insurance company, I cannot legally film with a tripod in New York City.

It was interesting to note that the public hearing was only attended by one person who spoke in opposition to the new regulations. I would have given testimony, but did not know about the hearing even though the lawyer who contacted me had informed me that she was drafting new regulations. It would appear that the City made a minimal effort to apprise interested parties about the process.

While I can understand the need to regulate productions that might impede pedestrian or auto traffic or present public safety issues, the city's proposed policies go far beyond that and would have a chilling effect on videographers. It makes no sense to allow photographers to use a tripod without a permit and impose a different standard for videographers. Most video cameras can take "photographs" and many digital cameras can create videos. Why should one be treated any differently than the other?

My sense is that if you are operating a small production company, don't expect to get much, if any support from New York City government.
John Rakis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2007, 05:09 PM   #15
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Ca USA
Posts: 542
Actually, there is a difference between taking a photo and a video. A Videographer is taking 30 images AND 30 sound samples per second, this inevitably leads to a more landlocked situation.

A photographer can be more portable in several ways, lol, as long as the photographer has not set up strobes on stands!
Alessandro Machi is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The DV Info Network > Digital Video Industry News

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:59 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network