NYC will NOT enact restrictive access rules-YET! at DVinfo.net

Rob Katz · August 3rd, 2007, 02:50 PM

Here is an update on the issue:

As a follow-up to an issue which was discussed on an earlier thread:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=97801

The NYC Film Office will NOT go ahead and try to enact the proposed rules restricting public access to taping/filming/photographing on the streets of NYC. That said, they will attempt to write new rules then have access for the public to comment.

Here is the link detailing the NYC Film Office's release:

[www.nyc.gov]

Because of the very serious nature of the proposed rule change, it is nice to see that those affected can voice their concerns and that a local governing entity took notice.

More to come.

Be well

Rob Katz
Harvest Films

Jacob Mason · August 9th, 2007, 10:59 PM

Thanks for keeping us up to date on all of this.
It is a very important issue.
I think other people would be more open to discuss the issue and become active if they understood the potential impact this could have on them in their city or town as well.

Glenn Gipson · August 10th, 2007, 07:04 AM

I thought NYC had free filming permits anyway, no?

Gian Pablo Villamil · August 10th, 2007, 08:36 AM

Here's the link: http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/html/ne..._redraft.shtml

I live in NY and have some dealings with the Mayor's Office re Film, Theatre and Broadcasting.

Basically, the new regulations were an attempt to codify *existing* practices. Since they had never been clearly specified, there was a lot of "selective" enforcement. As a result, there was a suit from the ACLU and the regulations were codified.

The new regulations explicitly guarantee: handheld photography and videography, use of tripods for short periods, and access to newsworthy events. This was a step forward, since often the police have followed a "no tripods" policy. However, selective enforcement works the other way, and people have often carried out large productions without any hassles.

By codifying existing practice, the proposed regulations made it quite clear how restrictive things could be, and this is what has raised a fuss.

I think an optimal solution would be:

1) No permits required for those categories of activity already defined as exempt in the proposed regulation.
2) A certificate (open-ended permit) for small scale activities (eg. amateur film) - including activities that would currently require permits according to the proposed regulation.
3) Permit + insurance for larger scale productions.

Philip Williams · August 10th, 2007, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gian Pablo Villamil

use of tripods for short periods, and access to newsworthy events. This was a step forward, since often the police have followed a "no tripods" policy.

Hmm.. I hope their actual clarifications are... well, clearer than that. What is the definition of "short period" and who determines what constitues "newsworthy"? Would be interesting to read the official documents.

Gian Pablo Villamil · September 7th, 2007, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip Williams

Hmm.. I hope their actual clarifications are... well, clearer than that. What is the definition of "short period" and who determines what constitues "newsworthy"? Would be interesting to read the official documents.

Yes, they are specified very precisely in the official documents.

Adam Palomer · September 7th, 2007, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gian Pablo Villamil

The new regulations explicitly guarantee: handheld photography and videography, use of tripods for short periods.............

What do they mean by "short periods"?

Is that 30 minutes? 5 minutes? Also, how do they plan on enforcing that? How can a police officer know how long I've been standing at a given location with my tripod?
Is he going to drive by again after the "short period" is over? What if I go during shift-change? Can I get a whole hour that way? The law seems rather vague to me.

August 3rd, 2007, 02:50 PM	#1
Rob Katz Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: new york city, new york Posts: 594	NYC will NOT enact restrictive access rules-YET! Here is an update on the issue: As a follow-up to an issue which was discussed on an earlier thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=97801 The NYC Film Office will NOT go ahead and try to enact the proposed rules restricting public access to taping/filming/photographing on the streets of NYC. That said, they will attempt to write new rules then have access for the public to comment. Here is the link detailing the NYC Film Office's release: [www.nyc.gov] Because of the very serious nature of the proposed rule change, it is nice to see that those affected can voice their concerns and that a local governing entity took notice. More to come. Be well Rob Katz Harvest Films

August 9th, 2007, 10:59 PM	#2
Jacob Mason Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 205	Thanks for keeping us up to date on all of this. It is a very important issue. I think other people would be more open to discuss the issue and become active if they understood the potential impact this could have on them in their city or town as well.

August 10th, 2007, 07:04 AM	#3
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	I thought NYC had free filming permits anyway, no?

August 10th, 2007, 08:36 AM	#4
Gian Pablo Villamil Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New York, NY Posts: 138	Here's the link: http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/html/ne..._redraft.shtml I live in NY and have some dealings with the Mayor's Office re Film, Theatre and Broadcasting. Basically, the new regulations were an attempt to codify existing practices. Since they had never been clearly specified, there was a lot of "selective" enforcement. As a result, there was a suit from the ACLU and the regulations were codified. The new regulations explicitly guarantee: handheld photography and videography, use of tripods for short periods, and access to newsworthy events. This was a step forward, since often the police have followed a "no tripods" policy. However, selective enforcement works the other way, and people have often carried out large productions without any hassles. By codifying existing practice, the proposed regulations made it quite clear how restrictive things could be, and this is what has raised a fuss. I think an optimal solution would be: 1) No permits required for those categories of activity already defined as exempt in the proposed regulation. 2) A certificate (open-ended permit) for small scale activities (eg. amateur film) - including activities that would currently require permits according to the proposed regulation. 3) Permit + insurance for larger scale productions.