A Question for you guys

My guess is that they would say "don't do that" and go back.

But a mall is private property. What does this have to do with taxes and/or the government?

I agree. Regular "security guys" have no right to take you to some room against your will and grill you. That's kidnapping (no kidding).

They can call the police and/or tell you to leave the mall. That's it.

Around here the city helps pay for the malls.

So if your shoplifting your saying they can't do anything but call the cops and you can just drop the merchandise and run out the door? Bwhahahahahaha

A lot of security guys may have special deputy powers and yes they can detain you until authorities arrive. It is not kidnapping as you are on private property and they are charged with enforcing the laws/rules of that property. The reason for getting you off to a private room is just that...privacy. They don't want to be asking you questions and having a scene out in the middle of the mall.

If you resist them and try to escape this will only work against you when the real cops show up. They will want to know why your trying to escape, what do you have to hide.

I agree that it may have been a liitle over the top to drag someone off to a secluded room and giving them the 3rd degree. Explaining that you were only photographing your model should have gotten a "Well don't do it in here" response and you should have been released. Remember, if your on private property, such as a mall, they have a right to control the images of that property. They own it, you don't.
Then again if you clam up and refuse to answer any questions until you can contact your attorney they might backoff. Just answer every question with, "my attorney will address that, may I call him now?" Of course they may get frustrated and beat you with a rubber hose or a sock with a bar of soap in it.

They still have no right to detain you for photographing unless you still do it. No mall I have been to has givin be a list of rules at the door. Stealing is way diffrent.

But that is because the mall ends up making money for the city...

And most malls have a set of terms that you, by entering the mall, agree to. One of those terms usually spells out the authority you, by entering the mall, grant security personnel.

Many of the terms are selectively enforced--they are there to keep some creep from taking pictures of all the little kids... or one retailer from photographing another's selection of products, displays, etc. (this is where palm-cameras work out great!).

Penguin if I were a mall cop, I would beat you with a bar of soap in a sock as soon as you walked in. LOL

Penguin,
I can relate to you! I feel exactly the same way.
Read somewhere that photographers were "professional noticers". You and I are out in the world. We notice things that would make a good shot (maybe) but somehow feel restrained from taking that step. I try to smile and not look like a perv but I still don't do it much.
It might be a reflection of how I would feel if the situation was reversed.
I have a good friend on the otherhand who has no hangups. Takes the shot, maybe chit chats with the subject and takes more. It does not hurt that she is a she. I think people feel less threatened by a she.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not shy. But this is a real problem. I am afraid if I don't reconcile this it will have a severe impact on my future as a photog.
If you find a magic potion, send me the formula
(Oh, and it's A LOT harder to blend in with a white lens. TG my pocket book cant support those!)

Here's something I was wondering about. What if you take pics with some strangers in it and you sell the photo without getting their permission? Can you be sued? I see people blurred out on TV all the time. I figured the station wasn't given permission by the individual so they can't legally show them.

YES! there's lots of rules about model releases etc. Basically you cannot benefit financially from someone else's image without their concent.

This is so not true.

You can sell a photo as art without a model release. A photo should not be used for commercial purposes (art is NOT considered a commercial purpose) without a release because the person in the photo could sue. If you make it clear to, say, an ad agency that you do NOT have a release (and, for your own protection, get them to sign off on it (not that any would)), and they get sued for using it, you are not at risk.

This happened to me over a property release. A company bought some of my images--one of a recognizable building in town. I told them I had no property release for that particular shot. They said they didn't care. I had them sign a statement acknowledging that I told them there was no release for the image. They signed it. They used the photo "for commercial purposes," in a brochure. They were sued by the owner of the building. Their lawyers contacted me. I sent them a copy of the signed statement. I never heard from them again.

Penguin, just go out and shoot. There is nothing like the regret of a missed shot.
Best to shoot with a short-ish black lens.
I take my camera almost anywhere and frequently take photos of my food in restaurants.
I have yet to ask the chefs if I can take photos of them working. When I do, I'll keep it down
to a minimum of time and maybe three different shots, but I'll be cute and friendly...

J.

Then I could afford a lot of white lenses. Where are the smilies?

Security people can detain you if you have committed a crime, like shoplifting. Photographing in a mall is not a crime, no matter what the guys with "special deputy powers" say. The fact that you're on private property doesn't matter one bit.

You might want to check this out:
http://www.krages.com/​phoright.htm