Banned!!! Part 2

SBCmetroguy wrote in post #5793870
This still doesn't make posting the email wrong. No names were given, and I'd bet after his dealings with this guy he probably couldn't care less if he's a member here or not. If the other guy gets his feelings hurt from seeing his email posted here, he's got bigger problems than a little competition. The OP didn't call him a numbnuts (which he probably is) or anything like that, he merely posted the email as an example of the correspondence.

Living in this modern world, one should know by now that they shouldn't expect full privacy or anonymity on the internet. Email is no more private than a phone call, which can easily be listened to by someone with a scanner ... or better yet, by our own government.

Give me a break. He posted an email. Big deal.

If you actually read the email he posted you can see the pro photog is being polite about it, he even kind of suggests working together as they are looking to hire a photographer for the next season to do action shots since it's something they don't currently offer but would like to. Yet because he is asking a GWC (to his knowledge) to stop shooting a league he has paid to shoot and is supposed to have exclusive rights he's a numbnuts? Ok, and this attitude is why so many pro photogs don't like to help GWC's.

It's not about competition by posting the email it's more showing what kind of person the OP is in the pro photogs eyes in the comments surrounding the email. We can't speculate how he'll take it. He could be fine with it and say the OP is trying to learn, that's great. He could be upset and not want to work with the OP and just brush it off as the OP is not the type of person he wants to do business with and let it go. He could start spreading the word and adding something to the story to makethe OP look bad. There's plenty more situations that can happen to, but none of us can know because none of us are him. You have to look at the worst case scenario to know why posting the email might not help. I personally don't think posting the email is a big deal, but the first line before the email sounds sarcastic and the lines about being pushed around are far from whats actually happening. There was definate miscomunication and it's not the OP's fault, and it's not the pro guys fault - it's the leagues for not checking before gving permission to a 2nd shooter.

As for the stuff about not expecting emails to be private - well how do you we know the OP didn't cut off the bottom of the email that has a waiver saying that the email is private? (To the OP not saying you did, just a point). And can we get a little more paranoid about the government listening in on our phone calls and not expecting privacy....oh crap, I have some more points to make but I gotta get the door, Agent Moulder and Scully are here.

(PS: Moulder says hi, the government is watching you after those comments)

The debate on taking pictures on public property is endless...

I suggest this website for good information.
http://www.photosecret​s.com/links.law.html

MJPhotos24 wrote in post #5794515
If you actually read the email he posted you can see the pro photog is being polite about it, he even kind of suggests working together as they are looking to hire a photographer for the next season to do action shots since it's something they don't currently offer but would like to. Yet because he is asking a GWC (to his knowledge) to stop shooting a league he has paid to shoot and is supposed to have exclusive rights he's a numbnuts? Ok, and this attitude is why so many pro photogs don't like to help GWC's.

It's not about competition by posting the email it's more showing what kind of person the OP is in the pro photogs eyes in the comments surrounding the email. We can't speculate how he'll take it. He could be fine with it and say the OP is trying to learn, that's great. He could be upset and not want to work with the OP and just brush it off as the OP is not the type of person he wants to do business with and let it go. He could start spreading the word and adding something to the story to makethe OP look bad. There's plenty more situations that can happen to, but none of us can know because none of us are him. You have to look at the worst case scenario to know why posting the email might not help. I personally don't think posting the email is a big deal, but the first line before the email sounds sarcastic and the lines about being pushed around are far from whats actually happening. There was definate miscomunication and it's not the OP's fault, and it's not the pro guys fault - it's the leagues for not checking before gving permission to a 2nd shooter.

As for the stuff about not expecting emails to be private - well how do you we know the OP didn't cut off the bottom of the email that has a waiver saying that the email is private? (To the OP not saying you did, just a point). And can we get a little more paranoid about the government listening in on our phone calls and not expecting privacy....oh crap, I have some more points to make but I gotta get the door, Agent Moulder and Scully are here.

(PS: Moulder says hi, the government is watching you after those comments)

I'm not paranoid, I'm stating a fact. The fact is, emails, phone calls, etc are no more private than a conversation had aloud in public. It's been said that you shouldn't say anything in an email that you wouldn't say in public. This is because, as I have stated, there is no privacy or anonymity in email or on the internet.

Apparently we're not viewing the same thread, because the "pro" was actually being a douchebag in his email by making his situation seem more important than that of the OP. We all have bills to pay and mouths to feed... big deal. Even if the OP was truly competing with him (which he's not,) if he can't handle competition then perhaps he should find a different way of making money. His email was nothing more than a sob story which he used in a pitiful attempt to make the OP feel guilty of taking food out of the mouths of his children.

Still, the OP is shooting action shots, the "pro" is not. There is no competition there, and the OP needs to get in there and take advantage while he can. Since the "pro" doesn't have "action shots" in his contract, there is no reason for the OP to take down his shopping cart unless he simply wants to do so in order to please the league for now. To each his own, but I would leave the issue between the league and the main shooter, and I would continue shooting and selling action shots since there is nothing prohibiting it in the main shooter's contract. That's HIS fault.

From my quick read on this it seems like the pro was being nice about this. Not sure why he would pay to take photos but that is his bad. Anyway in my humble opinion I think you should have contacted him and sat down----- like the great Rodney King said" "Can't we all just get along."

If the league rents the field, it is no longer a public field for the time they rent it.

Scott/Cory - EXACTLY!

Brian - you obviously have no clue what you're talking about even though it's been said a dozen times on why the pro photog can have him stop shooting; As well as why the pro photog would have him stop shooting (exclusive contract that he worked to get - how about you land a wedding but when it comes time to pay the bride and groom say "oh our cousin was there taking pics and gave us prints cheaper so we're not paying" - let's see how much you enjoy a weekend warrior taking your job then); How it could potentially hurt business even though they're not shooting the same things (T&I vs action); As well as why the league would make him take down the shopping cart. You really are not paying attention to any of the responses that explain why and how, you're just attacking the pro photog without knowing the entire story or situation of what could be happening since there's some things that are unclear as we're only getting one side of the story. The pro landed an exclusive contract and you don't think he has a right to defend his contract? Guess we know who the real DB is, and it's not the pro who sent that original message.

FOR THE RECORD:

I was told that the land is private property where these ball games are played. It is owned by the Echange Club. Even though it's "open to the public", I was told that they "could" ask me to leave if I don't play by their rules. So, my question is.... "legally".... can I be asked to leave if I ignore all their rules?

snyper77 wrote in post #5797614
FOR THE RECORD:

I was told that the land is private property where these ball games are played. It is owned by the Echange Club. Even though it's "open to the public", I was told that they "could" ask me to leave if I don't play by their rules. So, my question is.... "legally".... can I be asked to leave if I ignore all their rules?

Yes. I'm also pretty sure that if you don't leave, they then have the right to call the police on you for trespassing.

snyper77 wrote in post #5797614
FOR THE RECORD:

I was told that the land is private property where these ball games are played. It is owned by the Echange Club. Even though it's "open to the public", I was told that they "could" ask me to leave if I don't play by their rules. So, my question is.... "legally".... can I be asked to leave if I ignore all their rules?

As I said in an earlier post, CONTACT AN ATTORNEY!

Another question, are these teams official Little League? Do they have the patch on their sleeve? If so LL has all kinds of rules about displaying and selling photos.

I think the FACT that the property is owned by the club putting on the games ends ALL debate. If they say stop or leave you have two options. Stop or Leave. Its that simple a this point OP is right by following what they asked in hopes of a more formal agreement for next year.

Yes, as I understand the situation from your description, they can ask you to leave their property.

Or they can restrict you from taking photos while on their property.

Or, they can restrict what you can do with the photos you take, while on their property.

Should you refuse, they would have the weight of the law on their side.

This would be true on public property, too, once you venture into using the images you take commercially, which you are doing. You do not have permission to photograph the kiddies and the event - for commercial purposes - no matter who owns or maintains the ground under your feet. Public/private property actually has nothing to do with it at all. Privacy laws do. However, the fact that they do own the real estate is just another arrow in their quiver to use against you and will make it even easier for them to control what you do while there.

And, in the case of kids, be forewarned that the courts tend to be more cautious and bend the rules in favor of protecting the children, sometimes to the detriment of your right to pursue business.

Commercial work is not afforded anywhere near the same freedoms and protections under the law as editorial work. There's "freedom of the press" and "free speech", but not "freedom of business and commercialization". You have stepped into the role of a commercial venture and are in violation of an existing, valid contract between the league and a pro photographer they have hired. There might be a little gray area regarding that agreement because the pro appears to have been hired to do one or two specific types of photographs, while you are offering what might be construed to be another type. However, if the pro is smart they covered that loophole in their contract with the league. In the end, the customers' dollars come out of the same pockets, either way. So, yes, you are probably infringing upon their business and their exclusivity agreement.

Now, I'm not an attorney, so this isn't legal advice, just what I've learned over the years shooting similar subjects and dealing with similar issues.

You might fight this and may even win some access to do what you want to do. But, in the end you won't gain customers by pissing people off .... especially the ones who have some means of restricting your access ... or by creating divisiveness between parents and the board, between board members themselves, or between the board and the other photographer.

If it were me, I'd simply be inviting the other photographer out to coffee for a chat, and see where that goes. I have a feeling, in part from that email exchange, that there is some middle ground here where everyone can be reasonably happy.

Note: The link lauderdalems provided is an excellent resource. But I want to point out that all the references there regarding "Permissions" that I scanned quickly appear to be related to editorial access, not access for commercial purposes. You have to make this distinction. Your access for commercial shooting is not protected under any laws. You may actually help out the other photographer big time, if you get a general ban on photography put in place in response to your actions. Food for thought.

David John wrote in post #5790776
I realize that this has become a matter of principle to you, but I can't imagine that the cash you'd receive from selling a few actions shots would be worth this kind of headache.

This is my thought exactly. If I'd been given this kind of guff, I'd have taken down the images and when the parents complained I would have referred them to the other photographer and the board. If that didn't change anything then I'd walk away...

Now that I think of it, there might be another option. Put the actions shots behind a password that only the parents get and leave your shopping cart up...

amfoto1 wrote in post #5797829
Yes, as I understand the situation from your description, they can ask you to leave their property.

Or they can restrict you .....

Well said Alan, and right in line with my understanding of the situation as well.

Yes they can make you leave, why have you not contacted the pro and tried to work out a deal as his sidekick for next year? I started reading from the beginning and what stood out too me was job opportunity but maybe that is the business man in me