Legalese. Can we photograph in malls? Toronto, Canada

[DocFrankenstein]

Can we do it? I have been harassed out of a mall while shooting a video under a pretense of "you can not film here because there are store signs and there are copyright issues"

Has anybody consulted a Canadian lawyer on the question?

[DavidW]

I can't speak to the situation in Canada, but I know the situation in England is that a mall is private property, and it's up to the management as to what photography they allow.

Hopefully someone can give you the information you're looking for.



David

[Lynn Minmei]

When in doubt, just ask. The worst they can say is "no". Of course you can still proceed if you wish, you'll just need to be more discreet :)

[ScottE]

Have a look at the current issue of PhotoLife magazine. There is an article on photograhs of copyrights and trademarks.

It is certainly not illegal to photograph a copyright or trademark for your own use or academic study, but commercial use could get you in trouble, especially if it plays a prominent role in the image.

They should have told you that you can't photograph there because it is private property and their policy is to not permit photography. The real issue is that you might get a shot of some rent-a-cop roughing up a kid or of some safety or fire violation and they could get sued themselves.

[DocFrankenstein]

They should have told you that you can't photograph there because it is private property and their policy is to not permit photography.
I've read an article for either US or UK law which said that this can't be done. Basically if you're allowed access to the premises, you're allowed to take pictures.

So, you're allowed into a mall, the mall being a public place... so you can shoot there.

I am trying to get ahold of a Canadian law or at least a precedent which says it's true.

The real issue is that you might get a shot of some rent-a-cop roughing up a kid or of some safety or fire violation and they could get sued themselves.
that sounds about right.

[sugarzebra]

So, you're allowed into a mall, the mall being a public place... so you can shoot there.

Virtually all malls are privately or corporately owned and therfore are not public places and the owners have the right to restrict access or activities (i.e. photography). Because they let the 'public' in doesnt mean the 'public' can do whatever they want, but rather must 'obey the rules' of the mall if they want to remain on the premises. Having said that, I cant imagine why you would be stopped from taking pictures in the mall.....with all the camera phones and P&S's around, a 'no photography' rule is hardly enforceable. Sounds like DSLR discrimination:D

[Halliday]

I'll try to help a little with US malls. I was a rent-a-cop at one. It is considered private property that the public is allowed into for shopping, dining and entertainment related purposes. If you wanted to photograph your family that was ok, photographing stores was not.
Since it is private property, as long as they were not discriminating they could make the rules.

[JohnEBongo]

Here is an article that clearly addresses this issue(at least in the US). Basically, if the mall is open to the public, privately owned or not, you can enter it and take pictures.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2005-12-29-camera-laws_x.htm

[DocFrankenstein]

That's the article that got me wondering, but the article is from US and Canadian law system may be different.

[schmoelzel]

My teashop is located in a public market and since I often take photos there, I have been asked by the security people if I have permission to take pictures in the market (not my own shop). I was also surprised that this is an issue but a quick talk with the GM of the market and I had permission to take photos. I guess you can always go to administration office and ask for the ok........it's easy to do and doesn't long!!

[PAS Photography]

I know that taking photos in any of the large malls (owned by CBL Properties - the main owner of all malls in the US) does not allow photography inside the building unless you have permission from the Manager of that particular location. I shoot some commercial work for CBL on new stores opening, meet and greets, and general internal use photos for one mall in IL. I still get hounded by security even now that most of them know me, they still ask and radio in if an office person is not escorting me.

[ScottE]

That's the article that got me wondering, but the article is from US and Canadian law system may be different.
Did you read to the end of the article?

"Let's say you're banned by the local mall for taking photos there, but you go back anyway and take more. Now you're trespassing. But unless the photos you take violate someone's expectation of privacy, your taking photos isn't illegal — only being there."

It appears that in the US, the mall is private property and you have permission to trespass for the specific purpose of shopping. However, the land owner has the right to revoke that permission, whether a specific cause is required or not I don't know.

I am aware that in Canada kids caught shopplifting are banned from a mall for two years and the police will warn them that they could be charged with trespass if they return during that period. (A neighbour had to pick his daughter up at the police station.)

[DocFrankenstein]

It appears that in the US, the mall is private property and you have permission to trespass for the specific purpose of shopping. However, the land owner has the right to revoke that permission, whether a specific cause is required or not I don't know.

I am aware that in Canada kids caught shopplifting are banned from a mall for two years and the police will warn them that they could be charged with trespass if they return during that period. (A neighbour had to pick his daughter up at the police station.)
That's very true. If you annoy them enough, they can just ban you and voila - you can't even be present there.

And it's hard to fight with them banning you - it's their right, since they don't need a cause.

or do they?

[short5]

That's very true. If you annoy them enough, they can just ban you and voila - you can't even be present there.

And it's hard to fight with them banning you - it's their right, since they don't need a cause.

or do they?

They can request the police issue a no trespass order which any officer can do and will if he feels the complainants request is reasonable. They are usually valid for a year and violation results in a misdemeanor arrest. The flip side is if the order is unjust or given for prejudicial reasons, and you can prove it, you could file a suit saying your civil rights were violated. This being the case an officer would be wise to use good judgment in issuing one.

[DocFrankenstein]

They can request the police issue a no trespass order which any officer can do and will if he feels the complainants request is reasonable. They are usually valid for a year and violation results in a misdemeanor arrest. The flip side is if the order is unjust or given for prejudicial reasons, and you can prove it, you could file a suit saying your civil rights were violated. This being the case an officer would be wise to use good judgment in issuing one.
So the burden of proof lies on me?

AFAIK the security officer is not a LEO, but a citizen. Thus he can't force me off the premises and can only practice a citizen arrest, right? Or not?

And do I get a paper saying that I was banned from such a mall? Do they need to call the police to ban me?

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'm amazed,. roughly 83 percent of all POTN members that ever recieve a PM from the Mods claim to be attorneys...
The logical conclusion therefore would be to correlate this random cross section with the general membership.. and thus 83 percent of our membership in total have passed the bar.


And yet we don't seem to have many posting in this thread.. http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/scratchy.gif

[DocFrankenstein]

And yet we don't seem to have many posting in this thread.. http://members.bellatlantic.net/%7Evze2hdzu/pics/scratchy.gif
Ouch! :D:twisted:

All the lawyers are in America and I'm asking for Canadian advice. :lol:

[IanD]

Ouch! :D:twisted:

All the lawyers are in America and I'm asking for Canadian advice. :lol:
All cut from the same cloth.:)

[short5]

So the burden of proof lies on me?

AFAIK the security officer is not a LEO, but a citizen. Thus he can't force me off the premises and can only practice a citizen arrest, right? Or not?

And do I get a paper saying that I was banned from such a mall? Do they need to call the police to ban me?

Well he can detain you and yes he needs a LEO to put you in the legal system or issue a trespass order.

I don't know if you get a piece of paper but the mall does and a report is filed you can get a copy of.

The point is it is a persons business or a corporations and if they don't want you taking photo's or doing something and you disregard their rules they reserve the right to ask you to leave. If you make a stink and don't cooperate the police can ask you to leave based on disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace or probably a dozen other trumped up charges. You may be able to make a case in court that you were done wrong but keep in mind the mall has a hell of allot more money and will probably win or drag it out for a decade. Also remember with all the bottom feeding trial lawyers trolling for cases the mall has to cover their butt. They could argue that you appeared to be a nut job with a camera shooting pictures of people in the mall and for the privacy and safety of all they kindly requested you did not do so. They will then say you got weirder and they had to call police. The court will side with them and the police trust me. You will then have a previous judgment against you that will not help in your next case. If they don't ask you to leave and you shoot up skirts of little kids they could be sued for lack security(remember the bottom feeders).

Do us all a favor and don't tie up the courts, waste the police's time, and cost taxpayers money, go shoot somewhere else.

[short5]

When in doubt, just ask. The worst they can say is "no". Of course you can still proceed if you wish, you'll just need to be more discreet :)

Very good advice too. If you go to the management explain you are not a creep and not shooting store signs to steal their copy rights you will probably be ok.

[DocFrankenstein]

Very good advice too. If you go to the management explain you are not a creep and not shooting store signs to steal their copy rights you will probably be ok.
You gotta be a real creep to do that. I can understand the motivation behind shooting upskirt... but to shoot store signs to "steal copyright" is really twisted.

I'd rather steal some copyrights by downloading some books and music off the net. :lol:

BTT

[short5]

You gotta be a real creep to do that. I can understand the motivation behind shooting upskirt... but to shoot store signs to "steal copyright" is really twisted.

I'd rather steal some copyrights by downloading some books and music off the net. :lol:

BTT

Oh no doubt the reasoning behind it is stupid I guess my point is it is a heck of a battle to get a shot of the pretzel stand in a mall.

[Steve Parr]

I've read an article for either US or UK law which said that this can't be done. Basically if you're allowed access to the premises, you're allowed to take pictures.

Try taking photos of the security screening station at any U.S. airport.

If someone asks me not to take photos, I'll allow my sense of decency to supercede my right to shoot. In most cases, if my presence there, as a photographer, is bothersome to someone, it's not worth getting into a pissing match over it...

[DocFrankenstein]

Try taking photos of the security screening station at any U.S. airport.
That's exactly the kind of photography that was about to get into a "pissing match" with the US government.

With all due respect for ethical considerations and "what would jesus do" mentality, I've been harassed out of a mall and was supposedly banned from from a public place near a business building. They haven't issued me any papers or called the police - just a verbal statement.

I just want to know my rights for now.

[Claire]

I've been told by a security guard in Sweden not to shoot in NK (up scale department store). There are no signs saying it, but I stopped after he told me and haven't since. To me I see it as being private property, therefore I abide by their rules. If it was a huge American shopping mall, I probably wouldn't shoot in a store if they tell me not to, but in the general walking area, I would (unless someone tells me not to, but I'd be more inclined to have a discussion with them).

[399Retouch]

Last August the Wall St. Journal carried an article about terroristic aspects of photographing inside large buildings like malls. The San Antonio, Texas, security guard interviewed said he watched people taking photos to see what they were shooting. If it was their family, that was OK. If it was the structure of the building, he would come talk to them to try to determine their motiviation. Were they just taking snapshots, or were they figuring out where to place a bomb or toxic materials?

About a week later I was at the Iowa State Fair, taking photos of the people and booths, and a guard came up and interviewed me (almost surely for the very reason described in the article)!

[cjm]

I know at West Edmonton Mall you can take pictures in the hall ways but the second you whip out any sort of camera , EVEN IF AT THE BRICK AND TAKING A PICTURE OF A CHAIR YOU LIKE! they come and tackle you with words. Never been to Toronto.

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

[quote=DocFrankenstein] I've been harassed out of a mall and was supposedly banned from from a public place near a business building. They haven't issued me any papers or called the police - just a verbal statement. [quote]

I spent some of my years between graduating from HS and before going to college (8 yrs) doing private security and investigations. Spent some time doing routine security before moving into investigations and management.

Security companies, rent-a-cops and private corporate security guards (mall) are not recognized as peace officers under Ontario law. While licensing by the province is required for rental security guards, this is to protect the customers.

The mall is private property, and your attendance there is as an invited guest of the stores or businesses in the mall. Same rules apply as to stadiums, sports fields and your neighbour's house. Violate the house rules and you will be invited to leave, and should you make a fuss you will be required to leave and then assisted to leave. Should the assisted part be required, an official officer of the law must be involved and they will make it worth their time, a notice to not return under threat of trespass, or worse, arrest for causing a disturbance.

Please note that a rent-a-cop or mall security do not have any more right to arrest you or detain you than a normal citizen does. the only difference is they have the authority to work on behalf of the mall owner/manager. When an arrest is done, they have the same liability as anyone else. Assault /illegal detention charges against mall/private security should be more common. They have as much authority as you are willing to give them. Unless they are acting to prevent harm to themselves or others, they are out of line.

As to the public place, just how public? Was it a open area in and around the buildings that could be owned by the property management? Such as a square between buildings? If so, this is private property, again.

No notice or writ? This just means the process will begin when the official police are called in. Previous history with the site and these records being provided may cause the officer to take more drastic first steps though. Instead of the notice, an arrest.

Is it a public park owned or overseen by the city, so as to be truly public? Private enterprise has no say. City or controlling civic bylaws have the say.

As an aside, Toronto Transit Authority police are recognized as peace officers under Ontario law and have the full rights of writs, arrest and confinement as police officers. Don't mess with them.

I'm not a lawyer, just some of the experience and training I've been through. Like any other comments, these are just my view as my experience has taught me. Use at your own risk. Nor do I advise agarivating these annoying people as it is a waste of time explaining yourself to the local constabulary.

[ScottE]

Never been to Toronto.
I lived there for five long years. You haven't missed much. The theater is good, but you spend most of your free time trying to find a way to get out of the city.
;)

[Steve Parr]

I lived there for five long years. You haven't missed much. The theater is good, but you spend most of your free time trying to find a way to get out of the city.
;)

Really?

I kinda' dig Toronto. I'm from San Diego, though, so I haven't used up all the photo opportunities there yet!

I also love Kelowna. I was there in April, and loved it. A little chilly in the morning, but when I enjoyed my morning coffee and my morning smoke, I was on a balcony right over Lake Okanagan.

Gorgeous...

[cjm]

I like Edmonton. Then again I am biased. But you have to like Yellow fields for as far as the eye can see because this city of 1 million is surrounded by them :) (but we have wild buffalo only 45 mins out of town :))

[braduardo]

This might make a decent sticky...