From: owen (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Aug 02 2007 - 16:48:45 PDT
A camera person and her subject makes two.
LIBERALIZED laws !?
Interesting way of interpreting the law.
On Aug 2, 2007, at 7:21 PM, Jim Carlile wrote:
>
>
> "If NYPD have been harrassing filmmakers without legal power to do
> so, boo to them. Giving them legal power to do what they had
> already been doing arbitrarily is hardly a solution."
> ---This doesn't give them legal power to do what they were doing.
> It gives people the right to film on public property without
> interference. Crews get 30 minutes. Solo artists are unlimited.
> Before these rules, cops made arbitrary decisions, like harassing
> people who were photographing the Triborough Bridge. Now they can't
> do that.
>
>
> "Filmmaking is a first-amendment protected right. Sidewalk art
> vendors have already been exempted from permit rules for just that
> reason. Even if these rules pass, they are unconstitutional and
> therefore could crumble if folks stick together. That's why
> constitutions are higher than city bylaws."
>
> ---They are not unconstitutional. "Artists" can do whatever they
> want to, for unlimited times. That's a good break. Only crews need
> permits-- and only after 30 minutes. No one's dictating content.
>
>
> " An indie news crew waiting outside the permit office, for
> instance, to interview angry filmmakers who were turned down from a
> permit because they didn't have enough insurance? Half an hour
> maximum. What are the odds of that news crew getting a permit? We
> want a permit to stand outside this building and drum up opposition
> to your rules, interviewing each angry person that you turn down.
> *And* we don't have insurance."
>
> ---News crews are exempt from the new rules. Before you get
> hysterical about them, I suggest you read them.
>
>
> "In my experience, cops can push anyone around who isn't carrying a
> photocopy of the court decision relating to their rights being
> particularly infringed at that moment and / or talks like a lawyer."
>
> ---Not any more. They will have to abide by the liberalized rules
> in NYC. And if you're alone, playing the Robert Frank role, you can
> do whatever you want to, for as long as you want.
>
>
> "See what happens if you don't have a permit and some shopkeeper
> calls in a complaint the second you whip out a camera. I imagine
> the cops will arrive and find some reason to move you along, 30
> minutes or no."
>
> ---Not any more. Can't happen with the new rules. That was the
> whole point of them.
>
>
> "Free if you qualify."
>
> ---Everyone qualifies.
>
>
> "What's commercial filmmaking? Youtube is commercial."
>
> ---No it's not. In fact, the NYC rules appear to allow even
> commercial interests to film without permits for a short period of
> time. That's a good deal.
>
>
> I don't know what's worse: the fact that some of you guys are
> getting hysterical over this, or that you don't have the slightest
> idea what you are talking about when it comes to the specifics.
> This is hardly repression. There are some valid objections to them,
> but not many. And I get a big laugh out of the "spontaneous" or
> "guerrilla" need to film in NYC-- for more than 30 minutes!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
>
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.