Comment Deadline For NYC Photography Permits

DrNibbler writes "August 3, 2007 is the deadline for submitting comments on the proposed permit requirements for photographers in New York. Here is a sample submission."

An alternate open letter

[heinousjay]

Ms. Oliver:

I am writing in reference to the proposed changes to permit requirements for photography on public property. The proposed rules, as I understand them, would require a permit for "activity involving a tripod and a crew of 5 or more people at one site for 10 minutes or more" (the 10 minutes include the time to set up the tripod) or or the same activity among two people at a single site for more than 30 minutes. The permit process also requires the photographer to carry 1 million dollars in liability insurance.

I understand that it is important for the city to draw a line between amateur and professional photographers. I have often heard of cheap professionals calling themselves amateurs solely because they use a low-end SLR camera. However this rule does not do enough to make that separation and fails to protect a much-loved American city. Allow me to suggest some effective enhancements.

About once or twice a month, empower the police to conduct thorough searches of anyone who looks to be taking pictures, or preparing to do so. Necessary permits should be found on anyone who carries a camera beyond a drug store disposable. Justice should be carried out swiftly in situations where the necessary papers are not found. A modicum of brutality would suffice in reducing recidivism rates.

Only when New York is free of people carrying unlicensed cameras can its upstanding citizens be free from the threat of terrorist attacks.

Thank You for Your Time,

__________________

What's next?

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll need a permit to take a screenshot of Google Street View?

Re:Good intentions lead to bad results

[phantomfive]

You know what, I feel terrible saying this, but living in a big tourist place (San Francisco), if I heard that tourists were going to boycot San Francisco, I would be overjoyed.

Re:Proposed regulations

[gedhrel]

Providing the four legs are the same length and form a square on a flat surface, and the ground changes height continuously, then it's a reasonably trivial result that you'll be able to place all four legs in firm contact with the ground simply by rotating them.

Quick sketch:

Let the four feet form a square, ABCD. Suppose A, B, C are in contact with the ground, and D is above the ground. Rotate the feet so that A->the original position of B, B->C, C->D and D->A along any path you desire. Keep A, B and C in contact with the ground.

Since in the original configuration, were B, C and D in contact with the ground, A would have been "submerged", then it follows that the height of D above the ground must have varied continuously along the path it followed from a positive to a negative value.

Consequently, there exists a point somewhere along that path where all of A, B, C and D are in contact with the ground simultaneously.

An alternate open letter from Muggers Of New York

[Anonymous Coward]

Ms. Oliver:

We the undersigned believe altering the permit regulations from:
"...photographer to carry 1 million dollars in liability insurance."

to

"photographer to carry 1 million dollars in small unmarked bills."

will further reduce instances of these manners of infraction, and our membership will gladly "spot-check" anyone seen carrying a camera to verify their compliance.

Thank Yous for Your Time,
M.O.N.Y.