Guy at Atlantic Aviation at KAUS prohibited me from taking a photo of a jet

[Everskyward]

Not so. Under Texas law, and most states, if you hold out to the public you are considered a public place. This legal area is what they use to go after "private" clubs that discriminate. Teaxs has used this to go after private sex clubs. All they can do is ask you to leave.



Bob

Ever seen signs prohibiting photography in certain museums which hold out to the public?

 

[Scott@KTYR]

When I Google my Tail Number this is what pops up

 

[narchee]

Maybe just a default answer. I don't like folks taking pictures of my plane, and I'll straight have a come to Jesus with someone taking photos of the work plane.

If you tried to have a "come to Jesus" moment with me I'd just keep taking pictures and maybe also video your rant and post that as well.

 

[JC150]

The topic of photography in public is one that interests me. It has already been ruled in numerous case laws that there is no expectation of privacy in public, and as long as an individual is not trespassing, photography is protected under the first amendment. If an individual is photographing an aircraft which is Plainly Visible from public spaces (the owner isn't making any attempt to hide it in a hangar), then that individual is participating in constitutionally protected activity.

I don't care about some stupid airport policy. Have you heard of the supremacy clause?? Article Six, Clause 2 establishes the United States Constitution as "the supreme law of the land."

VNY is a public airport, the guy wasn't trespassing, and the owners of the other aircraft made no attempt to conceal their aircraft from public view. Therefore its fair game. You don't want people to know where your aircraft is? Keep it in a hangar out of plain sight

 

[luvflyin]

Why? Because may FBO's cater to celebrity and wealthy individuals that may not necessary want their actions or planes tracked. Ramp guy does not know if you are a paparazzi, tracker to just an aviation enthusiast but they have the right to protect their client's privacy on their property...airport policy or not.

Probably this

 

[Lowflynjack]

I've run into a few guys like you. At a small airport one day I had a guy ask me what I was going to do with the photos of his plane. He said if I was going to make money off of them, it would be his money because it was his plane! As many other photographers here have mentioned, we don't have to ask your permission and you really don't want to have a "come to Jesus" with me...

Maybe just a default answer. I don't like folks taking pictures of my plane, and I'll straight have a come to Jesus with someone taking photos of the work plane.

As a FBO I'd discourage photos, some folks like their privacy.

 

[Everskyward]

I don't have any problems with people taking pictures of me, the airplane or anything else, but aren't you the same group of people who rant about photography from drones?

 

[Lowflynjack]

I don't take photos of kids in the park, but if I want to, I have that right. If they're in your backyard, no, because you have an expected privacy due to your fence. If I take a photo of a kid, I always approach the parent and show them and offer to send it to them free. I've never had anyone complain, in fact they usually love it.

I take a lot of photos at fly-ins. I've seen more than a few crashes. My personal policy is if anyone is hurt/killed, I don't take photos. I don't want them. Most photographers I run into don't share this view.

Cool, so you're cool with someone taking pictures of your kids at the park? Your wife at yoga class? Your loved one as they die on the side of the road after a crash?

Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you should.

 

[Lowflynjack]

A drone can look over fences and into windows, violating an area where you have an expectation of privacy you don't have in public. Your wife is sunbathing in the backyard, no photos allowed, on the beach or in your front yard, no protection. There's also a law about photos to be used in a sexual nature, which is a gray area.

I don't have any problems with people taking pictures of me, the airplane or anything else, but aren't you the same group of people who rant about photography from drones?

 

[Everskyward]

A drone can look over fences and into windows, violating an area where you have an expectation of privacy you don't have in public. Your wife is sunbathing in the backyard, no photos allowed, on the beach or in your front yard, no protection. There's also a law about photos to be used in a sexual nature, which is a gray area.

A drone can look over a fence but so can a person on foot. We were talking about public places.

 

[Flymeariver]

I know at the FBO where I work that a FBO contract for one of the largest fractional operators shows that the FBO can not permit photos of any of their aircraft or customers without the operators approval.
I'm not saying this is right or wrong or what happened in this scenario but just is what popped in my head.

 

[Lowflynjack]

Right, but taking a photo over the fence on foot or by drone is illegal. I see what you're saying and I'm personally okay with drones in public places! In fact, we had a very cool drone video taken of us at a fly-in called Critter's Lodge!

A drone can look over a fence but so can a person on foot. We were talking about public places.

 

[Lowflynjack]

So that brings up a good point. If you were on the FBO's ramp, they are renting that space from the airport and they have a right to ask you not to take photos from their ramp, just like a store can prohibit it.

I know at the FBO where I work that a FBO contract for one of the largest fractional operators shows that the FBO can not permit photos of any of their aircraft or customers without the operators approval.
I'm not saying this is right or wrong or what happened in this scenario but just is what popped in my head.

 

[ElPaso Pilot]

The topic of photography in public is one that interests me. It has already been ruled in numerous case laws that there is no expectation of privacy in public, and as long as an individual is not trespassing, photography is protected under the first amendment. If an individual is photographing an aircraft which is Plainly Visible from public spaces (the owner isn't making any attempt to hide it in a hangar), then that individual is participating in constitutionally protected activity.

I don't care about some stupid airport policy. Have you heard of the supremacy clause?? Article Six, Clause 2 establishes the United States Constitution as "the supreme law of the land."

VNY is a public airport, the guy wasn't trespassing, and the owners of the other aircraft made no attempt to conceal their aircraft from public view. Therefore its fair game. You don't want people to know where your aircraft is? Keep it in a hangar out of plain sight

Not trespassing? You are apparently per KMMU (Morristown, NJ).

There is a large sign near the airport entrance that bans photography on the airport without prior approval, subject to prosecution under N.J.S. 2C 18-3b.

Looking up this statue gives me "Defiant Trespass":

2C:18-3. b. Defiant trespasser. A person commits a petty disorderly persons offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place as to which notice against trespass is given by:

(1) Actual communication to the actor; or

(2) Posting in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders; or

(3) Fencing or other enclosure manifestly designed to exclude intruders.

I defy someone to tell me how this has can apply to photography at a public airport...

 

[NJP_MAN]

If anyone had a "come to Jesus" with me then I'm going to have a "come to Joe Pesci" with them.

 

[petrolero]

Cool, so you're cool with someone taking pictures of your kids at the park? Your wife at yoga class? Your loved one as they die on the side of the road after a crash?

Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you should.

You have a false expectation of privacy.

 

[bullwinkle]

If you are at a public airport, nobody can stop you from taking their photo, it's a public place. They can ask you not to, but they can't do anything if you take them anyway. This is what gets cops in trouble all the time, when they think that they can arrest and harass people for filming them in their duties in public.

If they don't want to be filmed, they should buy or build a private airfield.

 

[JC150]

Not trespassing? You are apparently per KMMU (Morristown, NJ).
There is a large sign near the airport entrance that bans photography on the airport without prior approval, subject to prosecution under N.J.S. 2C 18-3b.
Looking up this statue gives me "Defiant Trespass":
I defy someone to tell me how this has can apply to photography at a public airport...

I could see a liability issue for the city or airport authority if John Doe, with no aviation experience, walks onto the ramp to take pictures of the security systems and tries to photograph the contents of the hangars. Thats trespassing since he has no business there. If John Doe is doing that from outside the perimeter fence and simply standing on a road funded by the taxpayers, then he has every right to film and photograph anything that can be seen from his location.

If you have a legitimate purpose there (such as landing a plane there), then I think you have every right to take pictures of your plane. They just don't want you out there for several hours on the ramp because if you got hurt it could be a liability issue for them. If someone tries to go after you for photographing your plane, I don't see that being upheld in court and a simple motion to dismiss on the basis of the case lacking merit should do the trick. If not, an appellate court should fix it by then. If not, then why do we even have a constitution if anyone can write and execute laws that go against our constitutional rights??

 

[rocketflyer84]

Not trespassing? You are apparently per KMMU (Morristown, NJ).

There is a large sign near the airport entrance that bans photography on the airport without prior approval, subject to prosecution under N.J.S. 2C 18-3b.

Looking up this statue gives me "Defiant Trespass":


I defy someone to tell me how this has can apply to photography at a public airport...

It doesn't. People put up all sorts of bull**** signs. It doesn't change what the law actually is/says.

As I said earlier they can't outlaw you from taking pictures. They can charge you with trespassing if you are on their property without permission. If you have a right / permission to be on the ramp and whip out a camera there's really nothing they can do apart from asking you to leave.

 

[ElPaso Pilot]

It doesn't.

As I said earlier they can't outlaw you from taking pictures. They can charge you with trespassing if you are on their property without permission. If you have a right / permission to be on the ramp and whip out a camera there's really nothing they can do apart from asking you to leave.

If someone goes onto the ramp / field and has no business being there then that's trespassing, regardless of if they're taking pics or whatever. But someone that is allowed to be there taking pics... if they don't like it they can pound sand.

Class D airport, well fenced. No one is on the field without being let in by an FBO unless they have their own ramp access.

There are numerous parking lots / public road access with views of the pretty planes through the chain link, however. The sign is posted on one of those roads.

 

[JCranford]

Ever seen signs prohibiting photography in certain museums which hold out to the public?

And STILL not illegal. They can ask you to leave for violating their 'policy', and call the cops for criminal trespass if you don't, but taking the picture is perfectly legal and they cant stop you.

 

[Lindberg]

Ever seen signs prohibiting photography in certain museums which hold out to the public?

The museum can certainly ask you to leave. It can't seize your camera or manhandle you, or anything like that. If Atlantic does indeed own part of the ramp, the line boy can also ask you to leave that area. But they don't own the whole ramp. And since Bergstrom is owned by the city, any photography policy has to comport with the first amendment.

 

[Everskyward]

And STILL not illegal. They can ask you to leave for violating their 'policy', and call the cops for criminal trespass if you don't, but taking the picture is perfectly legal and they cant stop you.

I would say that being escorted out by the police is "stopping you".

As someone else wrote, just because you might not be doing something illegal doesn't make it a good idea. That's why more and more laws and ordinances come into existence. People do not exercise common courtesy. Those who know me know I love to take pictures, even around airports. But if someone asked me not to do so I would comply. That said, it's never happened to me and I have taken pictures on the ramp at Austin.

 

[JC150]

There are numerous parking lots / public road access with views of the pretty planes through the chain link, however. The sign is posted on one of those roads.

If a photographer gets charged for taking pictures from one of those roads and if it is indeed a public place, there is no way that would hold up in court.

In the end its your responsibility as a citizen to know your rights. They can post the signs, and they may in fact call the police, but the constitution can't be trumped. If you are taking pictures and can prove that you're trying to send a message and you can prove you have an audience, you will be fine. This may be as simple as wanting to post on facebook to show your friends (audience) how nice that Gulfstream G550 looks (message). First Amendment protects you.

 

[rocketflyer84]

Class D airport, well fenced. No one is on the field without being let in by an FBO unless they have their own ramp access.

There are numerous parking lots / public road access with views of the pretty planes through the chain link, however. The sign is posted on one of those roads.

Yeah, it's just some clueless noob ordering up dumb signs. If someone wants to take pics from the fence line it's perfectly legal for them to do so. Otherwise there's a whole lotta people over at airliners.net that are in big trouble

 

[JC150]

Yeah, it's just some clueless noob ordering up dumb signs. If someone wants to take pics from the fence line it's perfectly legal for them to do so. Otherwise there's a whole lotta people over at airliners.net that are in big trouble

I wish I could "LIKE" comments here. You are spot on!

 

[James331]

I don't take photos of kids in the park, but if I want to, I have that right. If they're in your backyard, no, because you have an expected privacy due to your fence. If I take a photo of a kid, I always approach the parent and show them and offer to send it to them free. I've never had anyone complain, in fact they usually love it.

I take a lot of photos at fly-ins. I've seen more than a few crashes. My personal policy is if anyone is hurt/killed, I don't take photos. I don't want them. Most photographers I run into don't share this view.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Taking a picture of me landing my plane on a lake, sure, taking pictures of my girl in her bikini swimming around, creep move and not cool.

Taking pictures of EMS folks working on someone with major trauma, legal but not cool.


I'm just saying have some respect.

Go ahead and shoot away at planes on the ramp, just don't be taking pictures of folks getting in and out of the planes unless they say it's ok, it's just creepy and being a jerk.

You shouldn't need a law to not to creepy crap.

 

[Lowflynjack]

Not arguing that. There is a courtesy line most of us wouldn't cross, but it's just not a law. A lot of people think it's illegal to take photos of their kids without their permission, but there are plenty of photographers that like the candid shot, so they don't want you to pose. We recently had a police officer killed in the line of duty. I took quite a few photos of kids holding American flags and signs supporting the police. I always walked over and told them it was for the local news and the Police Department. It helps that I have a big camera and lens. Trust me I agree, it can become creepy quickly.

As far as an accident, I don't normally want those photos, but sometimes we take them. It can show the police and EMS in action. I also understand if someone is upset with me taking photos when their lives are turned upside down and I try to be sensitive to that. The police actually drove me through the Bastrop fire here in Texas and even though it was horrible to see people losing their homes, it also needed to be documented for history. There's always a gray line, but for me I try to be as kind as I can.

On the other hand, if someone storms up to me and wants to have a "come to Jesus" conversation with me for photographing their company plane, they've pretty much guaranteed I'm going to take a lot more photos than I had planned! I know my rights and I won't have them walked on.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Taking a picture of me landing my plane on a lake, sure, taking pictures of my girl in her bikini swimming around, creep move and not cool.

Taking pictures of EMS folks working on someone with major trauma, legal but not cool.


I'm just saying have some respect.

Go ahead and shoot away at planes on the ramp, just don't be taking pictures of folks getting in and out of the planes unless they say it's ok, it's just creepy and being a jerk.

You shouldn't need a law to not to creepy crap.

 

[overdrive148]

I'm gonna have to ask you guys not to look at this post or take screenshots of it.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Not arguing that. There is a courtesy line most of us wouldn't cross, but it's just not a law. A lot of people think it's illegal to take photos of their kids without their permission, but there are plenty of photographers that like the candid shot, so they don't want you to pose. We recently had a police officer killed in the line of duty. I took quite a few photos of kids holding American flags and signs supporting the police. I always walked over and told them it was for the local news and the Police Department. It helps that I have a big camera and lens. Trust me I agree, it can become creepy quickly.

As far as an accident, I don't normally want those photos, but sometimes we take them. It can show the police and EMS in action. I also understand if someone is upset with me taking photos when their lives are turned upside down and I try to be sensitive to that. The police actually drove me through the Bastrop fire here in Texas and even though it was horrible to see people losing their homes, it also needed to be documented for history. There's always a gray line, but for me I try to be as kind as I can.

On the other hand, if someone storms up to me and wants to have a "come to Jesus" conversation with me for photographing their company plane, they've pretty much guaranteed I'm going to take a lot more photos than I had planned! I know my rights and I won't have them walked on.

I agree with this sentiment. I think someone in Farmingdale, NY had a similar situation at the local airport. He was outside the chain link fence and the police told the airport authorities that the photographer was within their rights to take pictures from there. It was a post on a photography forum.

 

[Lindberg]

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Taking a picture of me landing my plane on a lake, sure, taking pictures of my girl in her bikini swimming around, creep move and not cool.

Taking pictures of EMS folks working on someone with major trauma, legal but not cool.


I'm just saying have some respect.

Go ahead and shoot away at planes on the ramp, just don't be taking pictures of folks getting in and out of the planes unless they say it's ok, it's just creepy and being a jerk.

You shouldn't need a law to not to creepy crap.

If I'm in public and someone is photographing my kids and it makes me uncomfortable, we'll leave. I won't threaten anyone or have a "come to Jesus meeting" with anyone. Why, he's not doing anything wrong. Don't want people to look at your girlfriend? Get an ugly girlfriend, tell her to cover up, or swim at home. Otherwise, people will look, and some will take pictures. Be flattered or get over it.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

One more thing- if you want me to not photograph your plane or whatever, please be respectful.

A conversation along the lines of "...I know you are within your rights to take pictures of my plane (children, whatever), but it makes me uncomfortable. I know I can't make you do so, but would you please stop taking those photographs?" is far more likely to make me stop by far than any sort of "come to Jesus" conversation. I'm by no means any sort of professional photographer and any pictures are for my own enjoyment.

 

[Lowflynjack]

I admit it would bother me if someone just started taking photos of my kids. I would probably ask them what they're doing, but as you stated they're not legally doing anything wrong, so it's not like you can do much other than leave.

If I'm in public and someone is photographing my kids and it makes me uncomfortable, we'll leave. I won't threaten anyone or have a "come to Jesus meeting" with anyone. Why, he's not doing anything wrong.

I didn't even want to until you told me I couldn't. Now I'm not sure I can stop myself!

I'm gonna have to ask you guys not to look at this post or take screenshots of it.

Couldn't agree more!

One more thing- if you want me to not photograph your plane or whatever, please be respectful.

A conversation along the lines of "...I know you are within your rights to take pictures of my plane (children, whatever), but it makes me uncomfortable. I know I can't make you do so, but would you please stop taking those photographs?" is far more likely to make me stop by far than any sort of "come to Jesus" conversation.

 

[James331]

If I'm in public and someone is photographing my kids and it makes me uncomfortable, we'll leave. I won't threaten anyone or have a "come to Jesus meeting" with anyone. Why, he's not doing anything wrong. Don't want people to look at your girlfriend? Get an ugly girlfriend, tell her to cover up, or swim at home. Otherwise, people will look, and some will take pictures. Be flattered or get over it.

In not going to uproot and leave because someone wants to be a creep, if we are playing the "waaahh boho, buuut its legal" game, plenty of "legal" things I can do to make some creeper uncomfortable enough to leave me and mine alone.

Another plus with creeps, they often don't have many/any friends to act as witness.

When all is said and done, just be friendly and have some respect. If you come up on me and my girl swimming in some lake, stop by and say hi, I love shooting the chit with people and I'll probably toss you a beer and we can hang out, or you can creep on us taking photos and we can go down a different path.

As for taking pictures of disasters or hurt people, just be cool with getting you camera taken and potentially being beaten with it, it's not legal but you choose to put yourself into that situation, not many folks with have much sympathy.

Just be respectful and use common sense is all.

 

[petrolero]

Maybe just a default answer. I don't like folks taking pictures of my plane, and I'll straight have a come to Jesus with someone taking photos of the work plane.

As a FBO I'd discourage photos, some folks like their privacy.

You started with this, which is irrational and misplaced when you are operating at a public airport. Folks who like their privacy can register their aircraft under an LLC and most of them do.

But then you made a quantum leap with this non sequitur...

Cool, so you're cool with someone taking pictures of your kids at the park? Your wife at yoga class? Your loved one as they die on the side of the road after a crash?

Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you should.

And you're still arguing about some vague standards of "creepy" that I don't even find relevant to taking a pic of a plane at a public airport (or anywhere else in plain view for that matter), which is what the thread is about.

People make a hobby out of going and spotting airplanes.

If you're going to "straight have a come to Jesus" with all those people then you're going to be having a lot of Jesus arrivals and probably a non-zero number of fist fights.

This is not the equivalent of "creeping" on your kids or your wife or whatever other unrelated scenario you're imagining.

 

[Lowflynjack]

He's just looking for a fight behind a keyboard. I guess I'm a big enough guy that someone trying to take my camera from me and beat me with it doesn't really scare me! I will take photos of any airplane I want to, simple as that.

To be completely fair, I guess I do fall into the creeper category though... I've taken quite a few pictures of the old girls without their pants on...

 

[Norman]

As for taking pictures of disasters or hurt people, just be cool with getting you camera taken and potentially being beaten with it, it's not legal but you choose to put yourself into that situation, not many folks with have much sympathy.

Just be respectful and use common sense is all.

That attitude will likely find you handcuffed and in the back of a patrol car.

 

[overdrive148]

A year or two ago I took video of an E-3 on approach for a touch and go outside of tinker afb (maybe not the smartest place to do it but they come right over the freeway and it's awesome.

A lady drove past and circled back and asked me if I was taking video and why. I told her yeah and because I like planes. She asked me to follow her to the front gate and I did. She had a talk with the gate guards before I pulled up almost like she was telling them what to say and they told me that they would prefer if I deleted the video for security reasons, even though they couldn't make me. I deleted it, they said thanks, and that was that. The lady had told me that if it wasn't for shift change or something that there would be cops everywhere and I would be detained. Oookay.

If you didn't want people taking video of your AWACS jets, maybe you shouldn't fly them in the middle of a state capitol if someone wanted to do some thing nefarious with them or shoot good pics o them, bigger cameras a block or two away from the freeway would be more than enough

It was brought up last time I told the story that it could have been filming the base facilities but I was clearly following and focused on the jet.

 

[narchee]

He's just looking for a fight behind a keyboard. I guess I'm a big enough guy that someone trying to take my camera from me and beat me with it doesn't really scare me! I will take photos of any airplane I want to, simple as that.

So, James, let me translate that for you: Don't try that little trick with the wrong guy. You will either get a well deserved smack down (self defense) or you will be leaving in the back of a cop car...

To be completely fair, I guess I do fall into the creeper category though... I've taken quite a few pictures of the old girls without their pants on...

 

[docmirror]

I think the only general law that applies in most states reads something like 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. So, bathrooms, shower stall, your bedroom, places like that. Public roads, airports, right of way, are free domain. Snap away, and if you get arrested, be polite. I don't think(but will not be looking it up) there's ever been an arrest for the actual crime of taking a picture or video(privacy expectation noted). Maybe for other ancillary things, but not for taking the pic.