Is the taking of photographs of the Luas system allowed?

[weehamster]

I was flicking through flickr.com and came across this. According to the photographer,

"there was a public announcement asking the gentleman with the camera to remove himself from "our infrastructure" immediately as the taking of photographs was not permitted." Is this for real?

I know that this isn't really a transport question however if this is true that I can't take a photo of the tram system, the question is firstly why and secondly is it actually enforcible.

[Mark Gleeson]

It is private property, it is fairly trivial to actually get formal permission

Note the Luas guys actually are on the ball and watch the network

[packetswitch]

Warning: pedantic post.

It's not private property in the conventional, we-make-our-own-rules sense - it is regulated by bye-laws which are statutory instruments.

And what's more, the relevant provision is:

"6. A person shall not on a light rail vehicle or a light railway without permission given by or on behalf of an operator - (f) use any camera or video recorder or any form of equipment for recording sound or images so as to interfere with any other person"

which is cast in similar terms as 6(e), which people will recognise as the familiar Walkman rule : 'use any radio or television or any form of equipment for replaying recorded sound so as to be audible by any other person' - meaning that a person who uses recording equipment that doesn't interfere with another person, just like the person who uses an iPod that cannot be heard, can be seen as acting in accordance with the bye-laws.

That said, there are lots of other general provisions about loitering, safety etc which can be relied on in dealing with a photographer - my point is that a blanket 'no photography' statement is an inaccurate statement of the bye-laws and thus it is inaccurate and deceptive for the Big Voice to come on and say that.

[markpb]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

It is private property, it is fairly trivial to actually get formal permission

Maybe a more pertinent question is why exactly taking photos is forbidden? Someone had to sit down and decide to write a rule for this, why? What harm can come from someone taking photos? Does it damage the station, get in the way of people using the station, etc?

[Mark Gleeson]

All the details are online http://www.luas.ie/works-film-permits.php

To be fair to Veoila and the RPA there is nothing more annoying bar some crazy trainspotter with a huge tripod blocking platform or tram

Nothing of course preventing you from taking a photo from the public highway.

Note the entire Red Cow complex is owned by the RPA and James is part of the hospital

[markpb]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

To be fair to Veoila and the RPA there is nothing more annoying bar some crazy trainspotter with a huge tripod blocking platform or tram.

That seems reasonable enough

[packetswitch]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

All the details are online http://www.luas.ie/works-film-permits.php
l

But that's not 'all the details' - it leaves out the crucial thing that there is no blanket ban on cameras. It is deceptive of Veolia to publish a form without a proper cross-reference to the relevant bye-laws (which as posted above do provide for non-disruptive photography and filming!); of course, they can have a system for permits (which the bye-laws suggest, i.e. that certain things are not permitted without permission, qed permission can be granted if they want to), but this idea of sending out one message (you need permission, photography isn't allowed etc) without even having the decency of citing the proper legal provisions (so that passengers can be aware of their own rights) is not responsible.

The better thing to have on the website would be something like:

Passengers are entitled to take photographs for personal use, as long as you're not getting in the way or causing a disturbance. Photography that interferes with other passengers isn't allowed - see section 6f of our bye-laws (with a link). Furthermore, we may restrict your ability to use a camera for other reasons, such as security or safety. For example, placing a tripod on a platform is dangerous. If your photography filming wouldn't be allowed under our rules, you may apply for a permit (link); if you have any questions, just contact us at (link).

On top of that, staff should be told that they are giving an inaccurate statement of the law if they make announcements that photography is not permitted.

(Yes, I agree with hanging the disruptive trainspotters and tying them to the roof of a Dart for a turbocharged torture ride around Dublin. My point is that in principle, when it comes to the things forbidden by bye-laws, passengers deserve to have the actual law told to them and not something that the operator grabs out of thin air).

[undo]

While the argument about tripods disturbing passengers may have some merit, I think we all know that the obsession with no photography being allowed in more and more public places is part of the whole terrorism paranoia that has gripped our world. There have been reports of people getting arrested for taking photographs of cops only to be released a day later by a very surprised cop who had to learn that actually, no law had been broken. I would absolutely not be surprised if the Veolia employee in this case also thought the photography was "suspicious".

[infomatique]

There is a bit of a story to this:

I should explain that I am not a train spotter and that I do not use a tripod. I am working on a project "The Streets Of Dublin" to photograph the changing city of Dublin. I have already published 11,000 photographs on Flickr and am building a site at www.streetsofdublin.com. The photographs are of variable quality but they are available free of charge to anyone who wishes to use them.

At no stage did I take any photographs within a tram (I have in the past using a point and shoot camera).


I got the RED line from Jervis as I was planning to take some photographs of wild birds in Tallaght. I was getting a bit nervous about two guy sitting beside me (they were openly dealing in drugs) so I got off at James Hospital. I decided to take a few photographs of LUAS trams leaving and approaching the stop. When the security guards arrived they appeared "nervous". I explained that I did not know that I was on private property and offered to show them the photos that I had taken and to erase any that they were not happy about ... they examined the photographs and agreed that I could retain them. I can accept that they would prefer not to see photographers on hospital grounds.

The incident at the Red Cow was completely different I was on the public path well away from the construction site or the LUAS depot.
I had a major problem with the expression "our infrastructure", in my discussions with security staff (on my way from the Red Cow to Tallaght) I asked if this meant that I could not take photographs on Abbey Street they claimed that this was the case (unless I had a permit). Later in the day I contacted the local Garda station and I also sought legal advice and in both cases it was indicated that if I was not taking photographs within the actual trams I could not be prevented from taking photographs (assuming that I was not blocking trams or public access to trams). At no stage could anyone offer an exact definition for "Our Infrastructure".

Applying for a permit is easy. However, complying withe the terms and conditions is impossible unless you are part of a large media organization. You have to supply names and details of your crew and details of your planned schedule in advance. First thing on the morning of the shoot you must inform central control and when you board a tram you must announce to the public why you are there. Maybe there is a permit designed for people such as myself but I could not get one.

I was amazed that so much effort was devoted to preventing me taking photographs and yet no one asked for me for my name so I can only conclude that it was not a "security" issue.

On the same day I was taking some photographs outside a bridal shop "Alexanders" (may not be correct spelling) and a woman came out of the shop that I could not take photographs as the window display was copyrighted.

Originally Posted by weehamster

I was flicking through flickr.com and came across this. According to the photographer,

"there was a public announcement asking the gentleman with the camera to remove himself from "our infrastructure" immediately as the taking of photographs was not permitted." Is this for real?

I know that this isn't really a transport question however if this is true that I can't take a photo of the tram system, the question is firstly why and secondly is it actually enforcible.

[Thomas Ralph]

Well, that last part is a nonsense. But it would be off-topic to go on about it.

Thanks for coming and telling us about it.

[Thomas J Stamp]

it sounds to me as though you met with a jobsworth. unlucky, but thanks for coming on and telling about it.

good site too