• Advertisement

[SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

General Transport Discussion not specific to one state

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Ken » Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:51 pm

In November 2005 one railfan was issued with an infringement notice simply for holding a camera on a platform.[citation needed]

The bit you DIDN'T bold was extremely relevant, so I have bolded it here. The words "citation needed" means this allegation has not been proven to be true.
User avatar
Ken
 
Posts: 2597
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:03 pm
Location: Ammo room
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 8 times
Favourite Vehicle: MAN SL200

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby jb17kx » Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:02 pm

AFAIK, Trolley Bus Racer, it's been established that there is no legal requirement for one to partake in Connex's permit scheme.
I certainly don't.
Selected artistic and gunzel photos from my collection - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jb17kx
User avatar
jb17kx
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: Not Toorak. No. Definitely not...
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Favourite Vehicle: Irisbus Agoraline

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby CB80 » Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:12 pm

jb17kx wrote:AFAIK, Trolley Bus Racer, it's been established that there is no legal requirement for one to partake in Connex's permit scheme.
I certainly don't.

Me neither.

If a staff member ever gives you trouble just tell them to call the police.
User avatar
CB80
 
Posts: 3731
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 5:13 pm
Location: Melbourne.
Has thanked: 135 times
Been thanked: 189 times
Favourite Vehicle: Leyland Tiger

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Trolley Bus Racer » Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:42 pm

i have got a permit... never use it anymore since i now know what i can and cant do :mrgreen:
Stagecoach Wellington Crew
Tranz Metro Crew

Now In The Eastern Islands Of Australia!
User avatar
Trolley Bus Racer
 
Posts: 3235
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:49 pm
Location: FP 4103
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Favourite Vehicle: Volvo B58M Trolley Bus

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Newcastle Flyer » Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:14 pm

I know it hasn't been proven, but a Flinders Street station staff member had a go at me for just holding a camera while entering the ticket gates.
This is my signature
User avatar
Newcastle Flyer
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Somewhere between here, there & anywhere!
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby jb17kx » Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:28 am

Newcastle Flyer wrote:I know it hasn't been proven, but a Flinders Street station staff member had a go at me for just holding a camera while entering the ticket gates.


I've walked through those gates hundreds of times with a camera.

In fact, I walked through those gates, was intercepted by one of about 10 AOs, had my concession card checked, and then took this photo:
Image
D2/016922E1
Selected artistic and gunzel photos from my collection - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jb17kx
User avatar
jb17kx
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: Not Toorak. No. Definitely not...
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Favourite Vehicle: Irisbus Agoraline

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Mark V » Sun Nov 02, 2008 7:14 pm

I will have to admit Ive taken more train photo's over the years then bus pic's and found it alot easier getting train pic's then Bus pic's, as I personally think train driver's are kind of use to people photographing trains and know there just "Train Buffs" and are'nt a threat. Ive had issue's on stations where ive been told to leave by SM's and even cops.
Around Sydney its starting to get a little harder where you can be standing on the right side of the fence then bloody cops turn up.. this has happen to me twice at Chullora and surrounding area's. Now I only do the occasional trip to the area for trains other then that I leave it to the Hunter Valley where ive never had any troubles and even the Police and Transits are friendly to you and even ask you seen anything good?

I'm only new to the bus seen.. about a year or so I got back into it, and found it a little harder then trains with just dealing with constant questions too what im doing at a bus stop with a camera :x

Alot of driver's are ok with it and understand that I have an interest in buses although you still get strange looks which doesnt bother me the slightest.

I agree with you David Sydney bus driver's are the worst.. and find they will actually stop there bus and say why are you photographing me? I reply im not im photographing your bus.. its as simple as that but thats not good enough for these weirdo's who are so paranoid I question if they should be driving a public buses :roll:.

Veolia driver's arent too bad I must say, only been questioned once and that was when I was photographing the Black VST for the first time.. after explaining Im a nut case :lol: he was fine although my accociation with Veolia made him feel a little better :D

Cheers Adam
User avatar
Mark V
 
Posts: 1555
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 7:44 am
Location: Hunter Valley
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times
Favourite Vehicle: Veolia 133

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby leopard1543 » Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:00 pm

I just ignore the whole lot of them and click away to my hearts content. I've been doing it now close on to 40 years and don't intend to cease now. Even those pesky security guards at certain bus depots don't deter me. :lol:
Bring back the Leopards!
User avatar
leopard1543
 
Posts: 4237
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Blue Mountains, NSW
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 51 times
Favourite Vehicle: Sydney/Newcastle Govt. buses

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby dpalenski » Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:50 pm

I only ever had a problem with one bus driver so far when taking pictures of buses so yeah i'm still doing
Formerly nzbcfanboi
User avatar
dpalenski
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:32 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Favourite Vehicle: NZR RM class Silver Fern

Bus drivers claims you can't take photos of buses

Postby Newcastle Flyer » Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:27 am

leopard1543 wrote:I just ignore the whole lot of them and click away to my hearts content.
We (another person was also taking pictures) tried to ignore a bus driver, yet he steps out of his bus, walks over to us, says something, then says "A lot of laws have changed since, . . . then goes and & says it's illegal to take photos of buses. I asked him "Please show us in writing were it says it is illegal to take photos of buses." I then mentioned okay then I will go to the CEO/(Not sure of exact title this person has, but I think it might be general manager) & ask that person of as bus depot. He claimed that this "direction" came from the CEO/GM.

Before that happened, I stood out of the way while someone else was taking pictures, and a bus marshall said "Can I help you". I just I'm right thanks, I'm just standing out of the way while that person takes pictures. She must have misheard me, and said sure you can take pictures.
This is my signature
User avatar
Newcastle Flyer
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Somewhere between here, there & anywhere!
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby routemaster2710 » Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:30 am

This is a major problem in the UK & has had a good airing in the press. There has been a petition to No 10 Downing Street, all fruitless. I was stopped in 2005 in the company of a chap who was taking cine films of the last Routemasters on Route 36. The MI6 building, it turned out was on the other side of the Vauxhaul Bridge. We were at this location as 2 routes crossed. We pointed out to this prat that to film the building from where we were was into the sun to start with. An Austrian Tourist filming buses at the bus station nearer the imfamous building had his pictures deleated. The UK has more CCTV cameras than any other country. It is tough being an enthusiast in a police state.The Austrian incident bacame a major one & was a disgrace.
routemaster2710
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:23 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Andrew » Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:30 pm

hmmm maybe V for Vendetta wasn't too far fetched after all....
.
Job done.
User avatar
Andrew
Administrator
 
Posts: 6960
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Campbelltown
Has thanked: 412 times
Been thanked: 236 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Frances » Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:35 pm

And I think the moral of this thread is, "if you want legal advice, don't ask a bus driver".

Neither the Federal nor the State privacy laws regulate the behaviour of individuals; they regulate the behaviour of government and business organisations. So the privacy acts would have no bearing on whether or not an individual can take a photograph of a bus, unless that individual was taking the photograph for a government or business organisation. It is interesting to note that Privacy NSW (the Office of the NSW Privacy Commissioner and the body which administers the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 of NSW), where a complaint about invasion of privacy involves a private individual rather than government or business, suggests that complaints involving neighbourhood disputes be dealt with by mediation at a Community Justice Centre and that anyone needing advice about other matters should get their own legal advice to see what avenues are open to them.

Stalking, harassment, nuisance and trespass come under the Crimes Act 1900, as does "voyeurism and related offences". It is extremely unlikely that photographing of a bus would fall into one of these categories, but if it does, you could find yourself talking to the Police. And if you were taking a video with sound, then there is always the possibility that the Listening Devices Act 1984 could come into play.

It is possible to invade someone's privacy in a public place (and I'm not just referring to voyeurism, which has a whole division of the Crimes Act 1900 to itself). A person who appears, without their consent, in a published photograph of a crowd scene, or appears incidentally in a photograph, cannot complain of an invasion of their privacy, but they can complain if they constitute the real subject matter of the photograph, even if it was taken in a public place.

And I would imagine that there could be safety issues involved with flash photography in underground train stations, so that might explain prohibitions there, although I would have thought that there wouldn't be any problems with taking photos in daylight..................
User avatar
Frances
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:08 pm
Location: In a Castle in the Hills
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Mark » Mon Nov 29, 2010 1:49 pm

While I was out last week at Bankstown Square Shopping Centre in Sydney, I decided (as I have done on so many occasions in the past) to take some random photos of buses that were there while I had some spare time.

After taking a photo of a Veolia Volgren, I was harassed by the driver who's face had appeared in the photo asking me what authority do I have to be taking photos. I politely replied that I'm a transport enthusiast & take photos as a hobby. And furthermore, no such authority is needed as it's taken on public land.

After reporting the incident to a representative from Veolia, I was informed that if I wish to take a photo of a bus with a driver's face appearing, I need to ask their consent first due to the privacy act. What if the bus is moving :?: This comes as a complete surprise to me as only 2 weeks earlier, I was at the Bay Village Bus Terminal on the Central Coast taking photos of buses there. While there, I started chatting with an inspector from Red Bus Services who was most helpful & courteous with my hobby & didn't have a problem in the world with what I was doing.

After seeking legal advice from a solicitor, I was told that the Road Transport Act (NSW) had been amended recently due to car driver's faces appearing in photos taken by red light & speed cameras and that the same kind of privacy issues were being raised.

Could somebody clarify any of this :?: Is what I did right or wrong :?: :? :?
User avatar
Mark
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW (Metro Bus Contract Region 6)
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 4 times
Favourite Vehicle: Mercedes Benz O305

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Frances » Mon Nov 29, 2010 3:55 pm

I would suggest that these Veolia staff don't know what they're talking about and are making things up as they go along, in order to justify their stance on the matter. Federal and NSW Privacy legislation does not apply to photography by individuals. The legislation only covers photography by Government departments or large corporations (and, by extension, persons working on their behalf).

The only legislation in place that I am aware of that regulates photography by individuals relates to voyeuristic photography or intimidation or harrassment (in the Crimes Act 1900 I think).

If the Veolia staff are so sure that the privacy legislation has any such provisions, maybe someone should ask them which Act they are talking about - the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Regulation 2005 of New South Wales, or the Privacy Act 1988 of the Commonwealth - and what section of that Act contains the provisions they are referring to. Somehow I don't think they would be able to answer the question.

Are there any solicitors on this forum who could comment further?
User avatar
Frances
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:08 pm
Location: In a Castle in the Hills
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Newcastle Flyer » Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:57 pm

Mark wrote:After reporting the incident to a representative from Veolia, I was informed that if I wish to take a photo of a bus with a driver's face appearing, I need to ask their consent first due to the privacy act.
According to their reply, they didn't actually say that you are not allowed to take photos, just the information about the driver's face appearing.

Did you let them or the bus driver (after he asked what authority etc) know that you are taking photos of buses and not the drivers, and did you print that document about photography that appears somewhere in this thread?
This is my signature
User avatar
Newcastle Flyer
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Somewhere between here, there & anywhere!
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Swift » Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:43 pm

Mark wrote:After taking a photo of a Veolia Volgren, I was harassed by the driver who's face had appeared in the photo asking me what authority do I have to be taking photos. I politely replied that I'm a transport enthusiast & take photos as a hobby. And furthermore, no such authority is needed as it's taken on public land.


If he continiues being stroppy just tell him you don't want his ugly head in the picture either! :lol:
Alternatively you could have a full head monster mask with you and tell him here put this on,it would be an improvement. :idea: :!:
'Neville Wran, he's our man. He's got this great state moving.'
User avatar
Swift
 
Posts: 9815
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:23 pm
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.
Has thanked: 561 times
Been thanked: 438 times
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Newcastle Flyer » Sun Dec 12, 2010 3:38 pm

Well no, so called security guard (who had no ID - only a vest), you can not ask me what I am doing, especially since I was on the public roadway. If you are a security guard, your "power" only extends to the boundary of that shopping centre.
This is my signature
User avatar
Newcastle Flyer
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Somewhere between here, there & anywhere!
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby meben » Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:48 pm

How long before our NSW Police friends think of such a register?
This is my first visit to London, so the mood is very excited.
meben
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:42 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Since NSW now has a change of government

Postby Newcastle Flyer » Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:27 pm

Refering to my post on page 2 here: viewtopic.php?p=316660#p316660, but the links may not work, althought the documents still exist.

Since NSW now has a new government, I wonder if that now voids those documents in those two links in my post.
This is my signature
User avatar
Newcastle Flyer
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Somewhere between here, there & anywhere!
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby 1whoknows » Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:24 am

Not unless the new government issues new documents/ policies.
Cats are best.
User avatar
1whoknows
 
Posts: 3485
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:55 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 246 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Newcastle Flyer » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:19 pm

^^

For NSW only
But say a person taking a photo of transport (be they enthusiast or not) has that doucment printed and say a transit officer claims you're not allowed to take photos of trains (or bus if say a bus transit officer), that person then shows the document saying that photographing transport is allowed, wouldn't a possible reply by the transit officers "Yes, but NSW now has a new government, therefore those documents are no longer able to be used", even if the new NSW government doesn't issue new documents?
This is my signature
User avatar
Newcastle Flyer
 
Posts: 4320
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Somewhere between here, there & anywhere!
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby 1whoknows » Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:43 pm

they could say it - but they would be talking crap.
Cats are best.
User avatar
1whoknows
 
Posts: 3485
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:55 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 246 times

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby R44 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:47 pm

its allowed then?
Asperger's Network - https://www.asperger.net.au
User avatar
R44
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:12 pm
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 42 times
Favourite Vehicle: MO-8205

Re: [SMH] Photography Is Not A Crime

Postby Bus 400 » Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:13 pm

On a recent excursion to Sydney, I was taking photos of a few buses at Hornsby Station when a few drivers came up to me & started talking about us bus photographers.....

He informed me that while he was on a TransdevTSL route service (I forget the exact street name) doing 60 kilometers an hour, someone has come out from 2 parked cars with their tripod, taken a few photos & scuttled back to the footpath. The driver gave a re-enactment of the expression on his face in the photo would look like. A brief description is him heavily applying the breaks with a I hope I don't hit the photographer look.

Now while the act of photography is not illegal, surely endangering the lives of the public around us is & a bit of thought needs to be taken when we photograph buses. Surely nobody here wants their last ever photograph to be of a bus seconds before it runs you down.
User avatar
Bus 400
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:23 pm
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 27 times

PreviousNext


  • Advertisement

Return to General Transport Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests