A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old April 1st 13, 04:39 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

On 2013-04-01 08:18:40 -0700, Martin Brown
said:

On 01/04/2013 07:48, Danny D. wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:01:37 -0400 Scott Schuckert wrote:

legally, they're a private company that's been given a
monopoly contract to deliver the mail.


This is interesting.

So do we know what the law is about taking pictures at
a private company which is open to the public?


You are stood on privately owned land and the landowner has rights over
what he permits when you are stood on his land. There have been a
handful of very spectacular image rights cases involving photographs
taken on private property that were then used in advertising campaigns.
There may well be a notice on the wall stating what is permitted. Many
sport venues, supermarkets and department stores have similar policies.

It isn't illegal in the UK but it is civil trespass if you do not cease
and desist from taking photographs on private land when asked to do so.


All of that makes perfect sense for photography on private premises,
such as almost all private property, some sports venues, many malls,
etc, and naturally, public property where there are legitimate security
concerns. However, the most interesting thing in in your post is your
turn of phrase, "You are stood". Somehow that sounds as if the reader
is wheeled out strapped to a hand truck, much like Hannibal Lector in
"The Silence of the Lambs" and "stood" in place on the particular
location.

Were you perhaps looking for "are standing"?

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #32  
Old April 1st 13, 04:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Francis C.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a PostOffice?

Scott Schuckert wrote:

Postal Service employees, customers, cover of mail and security cameras
cannot be depicted in the pictures.


I think the picture that was posted had a postal service employee in it,
didn't it?

One could argue that the identifying features were blacked out though.

  #33  
Old April 1st 13, 05:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Roy[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

On 3/31/2013 11:46 PM, Danny D. wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:54:31 -0800 Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

It is private property that is open to the public.

That means you can photograph to your heart's content as
long as the manager or clerks do not object. They do
have the option to ask you to leave if you don't stop.
Not leaving would put you in violation of tresspass
laws.


Do you know where we can find this written down so that
I can show it to the postal service?

Here, for example, is a sample pic (with identities blurred):
http://www2.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12561500.jpg


The USPS is an independent government agency and not a private company

Post offices are either federal buildings or leased space.
  #34  
Old April 1st 13, 10:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
MaxD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

On 4/1/2013 6:43 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
Jennifer Murphy wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 02:14:30 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."


May I ask:
Legally, in California, in a Post Office, when nobody objects,
is it against the law to snap a photograph or otherwise record
the transaction?


I have no idea what the law is about taking the photo, but I'm pretty
sure that whether anyone objects or not is irrelevent. Otherwise, I
could walk into a store, take what I want, and leave. If no one
objected, I'd be in the clear.


So you're one of the people that claim photography will steal
your soul, or at least deprive you of cash or goods?

How about looking at something in a store, memorizing prices (or
even writing them down!) and then buying where it is cheapest?
That *does* real financial damage to all the stores where you
didn't buy! There must be a law where you must buy whatever
you look at in a store to protect the rights of the storekeepers
everywhere!

-Wolfgang


I think the internet and discount houses have pretty much made
"storekeepers" obsolete. Unfortunate for the purists but nonetheless true.

  #35  
Old April 2nd 13, 01:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Wolfgang Weisselberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,285
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a PostOffice?

MaxD wrote:
On 4/1/2013 6:43 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
Jennifer Murphy wrote:


I have no idea what the law is about taking the photo, but I'm pretty
sure that whether anyone objects or not is irrelevent. Otherwise, I
could walk into a store, take what I want, and leave. If no one
objected, I'd be in the clear.


So you're one of the people that claim photography will steal
your soul, or at least deprive you of cash or goods?


How about looking at something in a store, memorizing prices (or
even writing them down!) and then buying where it is cheapest?
That *does* real financial damage to all the stores where you
didn't buy! There must be a law where you must buy whatever
you look at in a store to protect the rights of the storekeepers
everywhere!


I think the internet and discount houses have pretty much made
"storekeepers" obsolete. Unfortunate for the purists but nonetheless true.


It may be unfortunate for purists that you think that,
fortunately you are wrong.

-Wolfgang
  #36  
Old April 2nd 13, 03:53 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Scott Schuckert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

In article
eyinternet, Roy
wrote:

The USPS is an independent government agency and not a private company


Citation, please. The postal employees I know (including the one I live
with) seem to disagree; to the point of stubbornly correcting people in
conversation if they say the post office is "part of the government."

The reality is probably that USPS is a unique neither-fish-nor-fowl
entity, but THEY are very insistent they're a private company.

Post offices are either federal buildings or leased space.


Which proves? For a long time MY office was in city owned buildings,
but I wasn't part of the Philadelphia government.
  #37  
Old April 2nd 13, 09:02 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

On 2013-04-02 07:53:26 -0700, Scott Schuckert said:

In article
eyinternet, Roy
wrote:

The USPS is an independent government agency and not a private company


Citation, please. The postal employees I know (including the one I live
with) seem to disagree; to the point of stubbornly correcting people in
conversation if they say the post office is "part of the government."

The reality is probably that USPS is a unique neither-fish-nor-fowl
entity, but THEY are very insistent they're a private company.

Post offices are either federal buildings or leased space.


Which proves? For a long time MY office was in city owned buildings,
but I wasn't part of the Philadelphia government.


A little verifiable research provides the answers to quite a few
questions regarding this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Postal_Service

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #38  
Old April 2nd 13, 10:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Scott Schuckert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

In article 2013040213025428635-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

A little verifiable research provides the answers to quite a few
questions regarding this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Postal_Service

--
Regards,

Savageduck


Thank you. I will throw this in the face of the Significant Other next
time she starts up with the "I'm NOT a government employee!" stuff.
  #39  
Old April 2nd 13, 11:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?

On 2013-04-02 14:37:54 -0700, Scott Schuckert said:

In article 2013040213025428635-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

A little verifiable research provides the answers to quite a few
questions regarding this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Postal_Service

--
Regards,

Savageduck


Thank you. I will throw this in the face of the Significant Other next
time she starts up with the "I'm NOT a government employee!" stuff.


The whole issue of the private company vs Government agency argument
can be confusing, mainly due to the way it is funded and the employees'
pension fund is dealt with.
Note: that due to a bunch of Federal budget changes, postal workers are
no longer part of the Civil Service Retirement System and no longer
have payroll deductions into that system. Your wife should be part
whatever Postal Civil Service Retirement Service provides. Due to this
seperation she might not consider herself a "Government employee", but
she should check and confirm that the term "Civil Servant" is part of
how her wages are paid, and what she is going to depend on regarding
her pension.

Then, in the Wikipedia article above there is the confusing statement,
"The United States Postal Service is a Fortune 500 company." That of
course conflicts with the opening statement, "The USPS is an
independant agency of the United States government responsible for
providing postal service in the United States. Once one checks to
discover that there is no trading of the USPS on the NYSE or NASDAQ
that issue is a little clearer. The Fortune 500 ranking is due to its
status as the USA's second largest civilian employer with 574,000
personnel (as of 2011).

The other thing to consider is crimes associated with Postal Service in
the USA is dealt with by a Federal Law enforcement agency, and all
associated Postal crimes are Federal crimes punishable in Federal
Court, not State or local ordinances.

So while you wife might, as a Postal Worker, feel abandoned by the US
government in many ways, she is still intrinsically part of it, and can
wear the label "Civil Servant" with honor.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #40  
Old April 3rd 13, 12:43 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,misc.legal
Frank S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 153
Default Is it really illegal to snap a picture of a clerk in a Post Office?


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013040215500089814-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-04-02 14:37:54 -0700, Scott Schuckert said:

In article 2013040213025428635-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

A little verifiable research provides the answers to quite a few
questions regarding this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Postal_Service

--
Regards,

Savageduck


Thank you. I will throw this in the face of the Significant Other
next
time she starts up with the "I'm NOT a government employee!" stuff.


The whole issue of the private company vs Government agency argument
can be confusing, mainly due to the way it is funded and the
employees' pension fund is dealt with.
Note: that due to a bunch of Federal budget changes, postal workers
are no longer part of the Civil Service Retirement System and no
longer have payroll deductions into that system. Your wife should be
part whatever Postal Civil Service Retirement Service provides. Due to
this



seperation


she might not consider herself a "Government employee", but
she should check and confirm that the term "Civil Servant" is part of
how her wages are paid, and what she is going to depend on regarding
her pension.

Then, in the Wikipedia article above there is the confusing statement,
"The United States Postal Service is a Fortune 500 company." That of
course conflicts with the opening statement, "The USPS is an
independant agency of the United States government responsible for
providing postal service in the United States. Once one checks to
discover that there is no trading of the USPS on the NYSE or NASDAQ
that issue is a little clearer. The Fortune 500 ranking is due to its
status as the USA's second largest civilian employer with 574,000
personnel (as of 2011).

The other thing to consider is crimes associated with Postal Service
in the USA is dealt with by a Federal Law enforcement agency, and all
associated Postal crimes are Federal crimes punishable in Federal
Court, not State or local ordinances.

So while you wife might, as a Postal Worker, feel abandoned by the US
government in many ways, she is still intrinsically part of it, and
can wear the label "Civil Servant" with honor.



10-4.

There is "a rat" in "separate".

--
Frank ess


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Elderly female clerk dies after being set on fire by negro during robbery. [email protected] Digital Photography 0 May 27th 12 10:25 PM
Is Microsoft Office Picture Manager Any Good? Dudley Hanks[_2_] Digital Photography 5 July 29th 08 03:08 PM
Nikon Picture Project illegal operation error Lou Digital Photography 2 January 25th 06 10:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.