Taking Photos of Non-Handover trains

 
  runawaytrain Locomotive Driver

As people are aware on another post I pointed out along with the AETA SA Division and myself we are writing a book about the electrficaiton of Adelaide's suburban railways and I happened to ring Bombardier here in Adelaide and ask whether I was allowed to photograph the trains when they are on trial and get them published or not.

I got an arrogant answer from a woman who "absolutely not" because they have not been handed over to the state government yet and I told her that magazines and many other places like enthusiasts on Facebook have posted pictures.  

She tried to claim it is illegal because it is still copyright to Bombardier the A 4000 Class electric train and that is illegal and if they find out who has been publishing these photos they will take legal action.  

You guessed even Bombardier doesn't like DPTI taking publicity shots either of the 4000 Class EMU.

In my opinion its Public Relations BS from Bombardier or is it does anyone know the legalities of this and if so I have had it said to me about new buses when they are on trial on a route it is still copyright to the manufacturer.  

I thought we live in a freedom of speech and freedom to take photos country or is it manufacturers don't like enthusiasts taking there photos because some enthusiasts do a much better job taking a photo than a manufactures own PR department.

Sponsored advertisement

  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
I would ring someone else in that organisation. And then go higher than this hothead.

Regards,
Daviid Head
  michaelgreenhill Administrator That's Numberwang!

Location: Melbourne
Have a read through this: http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheets/info-sheet/street-photographers-rights/. It would seem to suggest that other than for the intent of pornography, voyeurism and surveillance, it is not a criminal offence to take photographs of anything, unless the subject material is copyrighted. I can't say for certain but I don't believe the design of the A City trains to be copyrighted.

At least you did the right thing by asking first! Smile
  Junction box Chief Commissioner

Location: newy
Tell her to snap out of it and do what you want.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
You have made one mistake and are perhaps about to make another:

1 You shouldn't have asked
2 Don't compound the situation - just do it!
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Norda Fittazroy
If it's out in the public arena, snap away. Just make sure you don't include any people without their permission. Then send a lemon to the person you spoke to; she can suck on it and maybe sweeten up a little.
  Pressman Spirit of the Vine

Location: Wherever the Tin Chook or Qantas takes me
..............In my opinion its Public Relations BS from Bombardier or is it does anyone know the legalities of this and if so I have had it said to me about new buses when they are on trial on a route it is still copyright to the manufacturer.  

I thought we live in a freedom of speech and freedom to take photos country or is it manufacturers don't like enthusiasts taking there photos because some enthusiasts do a much better job taking a photo than a manufactures own PR department.
"runawaytrain"


I agree with you sounds like PR BS to me. If they don't want photos taken of their product before hand over, then why arn't they covering them during transport and trials?
Just look at the extent GMH & Ford go to, to disguise new, unrealeased models during public road trials ...... and the motoring mags still manage to publish photos of them without litigation.

Sounds a lot like sour grapes from this woman to me, most companies would welcome the Free Advertising. Not to mention her attitude would most likely mean you won't paint Bombardier well in your book. If she was the opposite, you'd probably praise them in the story lines!
....... now which is the type of PR the higher Bombardier management would want?
Positive or negative?
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
It is not so much sour grapes on the part of the woman, but sheer ignorance. There is nothing to stop you taking photos of the vehicles if they are out in public view. The only time you could get in trouble is if a member of the police, be it state or federal, told you not to take photographs, other than that, feel free.
  Newcastle Express Chief Commissioner

Police can not demand you stop taking photographs taken in public.

See: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?24730-How-to-deal-with-Police-when-out-photographing-%28-amp-Photographers-Rights%29

But why did you ask in the first place?
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

I thought we live in a freedom of speech and freedom to take photos country …
"runawaytrain"
Yes, with certain reasonable exceptions.

… manufacturers don't like enthusiasts taking there photos …
"runaway train"
Freedom of speech includes manufacturers of trains or other goods being free to not like photos (or videos) taken of their products.

With the exceptions of those photos being used to reproduce a design or being altered to misrepresent the quality of the product, there is no special privilege given to that like or dislike.

They are also free to purchase the exclusive rights to the ownership and usage of a photo from you at a mutually agreed price, should they want it kept out of public circulation.

… it is not a criminal offence to take photographs of anything, unless the subject material is copyrighted. I can't say for certain but I don't believe the design of the A City trains to be copyrighted.
"michaelgreenhill"
It most certainly would be covered by copyright for a period of the original author's death plus 70 years. The original author for copyright purposes would probably be the chief engineer on the design of the 1980s Adtranz units from which the newest design has evolved through a number of iterations.

However, taking a photo of it would not breach their copyright on the design, as a photograph is an original work - basically unless you are using it in the process of counterfeiting artwork or currency.

To breach copyright laws on a train design would require you to steal the plans and use them for some purpose (making trains yourself according to those plans or a modified of those plans) without Bombardier first agreeing to issue a license to use the plans or selling ownership of the plans outright.

I would ring someone else in that organisation. And then go higher than this hothead.
"dthead"
No. A photographer wanting to take photos in a public space and use them for whatever purpose they want has absolutely no need to ever contact any staff member of any business.

Please note that railway stations in South Australia are not public spaces though. The occupier of the property (i.e. Adelaide Metro) does have the power to request people stop taking photographs or promptly leave the property at the risk of a trespassing prosecution.

At least you did the right thing by asking first! Smile
"michaelgreenhill"
Hell no!

Asking permission where none is ever required is counter-productive, and that action reinforces the belief held by law-ignorant PR types and the knuckle-dragging thugs they employ for "security" standover scams that for-profit transnational corporations are allowed to restrict photography in public places. Stop ruining photography for the rest of us by giving substance to that belief.

If Bombardier don't want their trains to be seen they should be testing them at a private track where they, as the lawful occupier of the property, would have the right to evict people if they refuse to stop taking photographs and/or deny entry to people equipped with a camera or some other device which includes a camera.
  Newcastle Express Chief Commissioner
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Have a read through this: http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheets/info-sheet/street-photographers-rights/. It would seem to suggest that other than for the intent of pornography, voyeurism and surveillance, it is not a criminal offence to take photographs of anything, unless the subject material is copyrighted. I can't say for certain but I don't believe the design of the A City trains to be copyrighted.

At least you did the right thing by asking first! Smile
michaelgreenhill
It's still (apparently) not legal to photograph or video in places like Melbourne Central station - it's a hangover from the terror attacks 13 years ago where governments of every hue got paranoid and decided they wanted to control all sorts of public activities that could be construed as subversion or plot-making.

However I've noticed recently that even though the signs are still in our major stations most tourists snap away happily oblivious to the legality... and the staff don't bother to stop them.  It's extremely hard to stop people now-days when every single mobile phone, tablet and device has a high-resolution camera.

In my opinion it's another one of those silly, unenforceable laws that didn't really fulfil the original purpose anyway.
  Poath Junction Chief Commissioner

Location: In front of a computer most of the time.
It's still (apparently) not legal to photograph or video in places like Melbourne Central station - it's a hangover from the terror attacks 13 years ago where governments of every hue got paranoid and decided they wanted to control all sorts of public activities that could be construed as subversion or plot-making.

However I've noticed recently that even though the signs are still in our major stations most tourists snap away happily oblivious to the legality... and the staff don't bother to stop them.  It's extremely hard to stop people now-days when every single mobile phone, tablet and device has a high-resolution camera.

In my opinion it's another one of those silly, unenforceable laws that didn't really fulfil the original purpose anyway.
don_dunstan
It has nothing to do with the terror attacks of 13 years ago. In the case of Victoria the situation regarding photography (in general) on railway property (which includes paid access areas such as station platforms and unpaid access areas such as Victrack owned parking areas and footbridges) is the same now as it was in 1997 when control and ownership of the railway infrastructure was passed from the Government (public ownership) to Victrack (private ownership).  As for the specific example of Melbourne Central the no photography ban was in place long before 1997 and reflects a need to abide by OH&S legislation, specifically the dangers of flash photography in the underground stations affecting a drivers ability to safely operate his train. Yes modern cameras can easily take a photo or video down there without a flash however the simple fact remains it's private property and the owner (Victrack) and leaser (Metro Trains Melbourne) have decided, as is their right, to not allow any photography in certain locations.
  Poath Junction Chief Commissioner

Location: In front of a computer most of the time.
Police can not demand you stop taking photographs taken in public.

See: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?24730-How-to-deal-with-Police-when-out-photographing-%28-amp-Photographers-Rights%29

But why did you ask in the first place?
Newcastle Express
Police can demand (and forcibly) stop you taking photographs from public locations in many circumstances, an obvious example is if your activities are deemed to be a public nuisance.

Do not really on the information in that thread - it is out of date (4+ years old), not written in any official capacity (in fact contains a disclaimer NOT to rely on the information, which is good as the person claiming to be a police officer hasn't given any verification of that claim), and has no references to appropriate legislation (which compounding the problem varies from State to State).
  Poath Junction Chief Commissioner

Location: In front of a computer most of the time.
It most certainly would be covered by copyright for a period of the original author's death plus 70 years. The original author for copyright purposes would probably be the chief engineer on the design of the 1980s Adtranz units from which the newest design has evolved through a number of iterations.

However, taking a photo of it would not breach their copyright on the design, as a photograph is an original work - basically unless you are using it in the process of counterfeiting artwork or currency.

To breach copyright laws on a train design would require you to steal the plans and use them for some purpose (making trains yourself according to those plans or a modified of those plans) without Bombardier first agreeing to issue a license to use the plans or selling ownership of the plans outright.
justapassenger
Very little of the train would be covered by copyright - the livery and logo's maybe (more likely to be registered Trade Marks), but the train itself, no. The primary role of every part of the train is to perform a function with the aesthetics of the trains components playing a secondary role. As such copyright can not exist in those items. Most likely all those components are registered designs but that has nothing to do with copyright legislation.
  wolfpac Minister for Railways

Location: Over here...
--snip--

I thought we live in a freedom of speech and freedom to take photos country or is it manufacturers don't like enthusiasts taking there photos because some enthusiasts do a much better job taking a photo than a manufactures own PR department.
runawaytrain
No, there's no freedom of speech protection in our constitution:

"Australia does not have an explicit First Amendment equivalent enshrining the protection of freedom of speech in our Constitution."

However, this nugget is interesting and could potentially "protect" the photography, as such?
(From the Federal Attorney-General Department)

"The right in article 19(2) protects freedom of expression in any medium, for example written and oral communications, the media, public protest, broadcasting, artistic works and commercial advertising. The right protects not only favourable information or ideas, but also unpopular ideas including those that may offend or shock (subject to limitations). Freedom of expression carries with it special responsibilities, and may be restricted on several grounds"

But in future, don't bother asking permission, just puts them on high alert to be on the look out to try and prosecute people (albeit it'd be civil, you wouldn't think they'd try for criminal... Wouldn't think so, anyway!)

Wolfpac
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Unless you are on private property, there is no law preventing you taking a photo and publishing it. After all how else would all those celebrities end up in those nausieating glossy magazines.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: KngtRider, Pressman, wolfpac, wurx

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.