Mall security guard forced me to delete

[pamela_zoslov]

<p>I'm a relative beginner interested in street photography. Because it was a rainy day today, I took my digital point-and-shoot to my favorite suburban mall, where I have previously taken some nice pictures with no trouble. Today, I snapped a few pictures, some scenery and one of a lovely elderly woman who gave me permission to take her picture.<br>

As I was preparing to leave the mall, a tall, imposing female security guard accosted me and forced me to delete all the shots I had taken (about three). I had a feeling she had no right to force me to delete, but I have a fear of aggressive authority, and was afraid she might confiscate or break my camera or have me arrested. After I reluctantly deleted the three or four pictures I had taken, she forced me to scroll through and PROVE that all the pictures taken at the mall were deleted. "This one is from my neighborhood," I found myself explaining of the pictures on my card. I don't believe I should have had to do that.<br>

I am new to photo.net, and I know this "private/public property" issue has been addressed at length, but I wanted to share this experience, which has left me a little shaken.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>As you've probably seen in many other threads, it does <em>indeed</em> come down to the fact that you're on someone else's property. There are changes, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, when it comes to some of the particulars. But it's certainly easier to assume that if you're on private property, it's a good idea to ask if you can photograph their customers.<br /><br />As for their ability to make you delete the images? That's (in most cases) a lot more questionable. The real question is whether or not you felt like making a stink about it. The private guards can ask you to stop taking photos, and can ask you to leave. They can also say that you're not allowed back on the property if you don't use it according to their posted rules (which brings up a good point - you might want to look around for an indication of their posted rules on the subject). But in most cases they can't, really, make you delete images or take/damage your equipment. <br /><br />Which doesn't mean you shouldn't stop shooting, and even kill the images of their other customers if they ask - since it's probably a place you're going to want to make use of again for other reasons, and there's no point getting into a big squabble with them over something like this. You could make a stand about the finer points of playing dumb about their policy and saying that you shouldn't have to delete images you shot when you simply weren't aware of their policy... but that doesn't really change the underlying fact.<br /><br />Yes, it's no fun that a thousand teenagers with phone cams will take a million pictures of each other in the mall, and that when you take shots of a stranger it makes them err on the side of telling you to stop... but that's the way it is.</p>

[Brad_]

The guard can ask you to stop. But that's all...

[frank_skomial]

<p>"my favorite suburban mall" - apparently is not a public place. Learn the mall rules related to photography, and obtain permit if required and you must shoot there.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<ol>

<li>Don't take any more pictures on that card, go home, and use data recovery software.</li>

<li>Go into any store where you're well known (or your wife is) and mention to your favorite sales person and/or the manager that you're thinking of not coming t the mall any more because of the incident. They know my wife and I quite well at the Laural Park "Parisian" store, heads would roll if mall security offended one of us...</li>

</ol>

[pamela_zoslov]

<p>There are no posted mall rules pertaining to photography.<br /> I do not believe this mall cop had the right to force me to delete. I regret that I was so scared that I complied with a demand that was most likely outside the scope of her authority.<br /> I'm not unwilling to get into "a big squabble" when my rights have been violated.</p>

<p> </p>

[hugh_j.]

<blockquote>

<p>There are no posted "mall rules" pertaining to photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There doesn't have to be, any more than you have to post a "house rules" notice on the wall for your guests when they come over to visit. You have the right to eject your guests from your home at any time, for any reason. Like your home, the mall is private property, which means guests visiting there have to play by their rules, posted or not.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I do not believe this mall cop had the right to force me to delete. I'm sorry I was so afraid that I complied with a demand outside the scope of her authority.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, she did not. She does have the right to ask you to stop and/or leave.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>It's a pity you din't stand up to the security guard and refuse to delete the images. But you didn't and from what you're saying you might not expect that of yourself. I wonder whether, if you are terribly aggrieved by this that some form of complaint to the mall operator, along the lines that you were illegally coerced into deletion, might provide some satisfaction, or in extremis a lawsuit, which it may not cost a great deal to ascertain whether you could successfully mount. </p>

<p>Basically you either have to stand up to these people, use due process to get them afterwards, or just go through life being prepared to eat whatever they throw at you. You need to decide what route you feel most comfortable with.</p>

[pamela_zoslov]

<p>I'm an attorney, and the "public/private" issue is not as clear-cut as that. A mall is NOT the same as a private home; it's a public place where anyone can enter.<br>

Rules are posted at malls prohibiting firearms and smoking, so why is the "no photography" rule kept secret and wielded arbitrarily?</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>I have a fear of aggressive authority...</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>you will have to overcome this if you want to shoot street with any success.</p><div></div>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>A mall is not like your home. </p>

<p>Personally inviting guests over to your house is different from a corporation opening up a mall to the general public for the purpose of making a profit. You have a right not to invite black people or white people to your house. The mall owners don't have that same right. Malls do have rules about photography and evidently they seem to be within their rights legally. Because they are owned by big businesses/corporations, few question it. That doesn't make the malls right, though it is legal.</p>

<p>The photography rule at malls is one I am happy to break because it's nonsensical (and it's easy to get away with). Call me an anarchist. If I get caught, I understand there may be consequences, although I'm pretty good at playing nice when I need to, to get out of a jam. Generally, on the other hand, when I am invited to someone's house, I am happy to respect their wishes.</p>

[pamela_zoslov]

<p>*sigh* I need to clarify, "aggressive STATE authority."</p>

 

[pamela_zoslov]

<p>Fred, thank you.</p>

[vivid_earth_photographics]

<p>If you refused to comply with the request (or command) that you display your images to the guard, I doubt they had any legal authority to do anything about it. If you simply walked on, and they would have to chose whether to use physical force to detain you for something that is not illegal--just against a mall "policy". Since the police would not have responded to a policy dispute (or at least have had no clue as to how to charge such a case), I doubt this could have ended with more than inconvenience and a possible law suit.<br>

So, I think you first move ought to have been to utterly refuse to permit what was in effect a search of your camera. As an attorney, I'm obviously stating what you already know. I understand that in the heat of the moment and when nervous, we all do things we might not normally do.<br>

But this is a situation I'd have risked challenging the guard on. They are mostly dopey cop-wannabe jobs and they haven't a clue as to the law. On that point, you have them at a disadvantage...but you'll have to use those forceful advocacy skills and courtroom voice to make use of your superior knowledge and position in such a situation.</p>

[pamela_zoslov]

<p>I wish I had had the presence of mind to do so, but this was the first time I'd ever been confronted with this situation. (And I should add, I'm a <em>non-practicing </em> attorney.) You are right, though, I really should have refused to relinquish my property. I certainly will be better prepared if it should happen again. It seems these shopping centers use the fear of "terrorism" to justify a whole host of arbitrary and nonsensical (not to mention invisible) regulations.<br>

You aren't required to answer questions by the police, and you certainly don't have to answer to Paul or Pauline Blart.</p>

<p> </p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>legal ritights vs private rights</p>

<p>Pa and 43 other states have various forms of " concealded carry "permits.<br>

a background check is performed on each applicant to<br>

the state is assured the person is responcible and not a felon.<br>

however heckingers, a nice " home depot type store</p>

<p>donated money to " handgun control"<br>

THIS WAS ENOUGH . IN 3 MONTHS HE WAS OUT OF BUSINES there was a video rental chain that prohibited "concealed carry permit holders to eneter these stores<br>

why carrying a concealed weapon<br>

( how could they tell?) this was in violation of state law.<br>

there are a few places you cannot carry<br>

like courts or a jail,a few other places.<br>

but as long as the store is located within the state the state law "prempts local ordinances or<br>

private rulles<br>

some places of business require employees to eith check weaplons or keep them locked in vehicles.<br>

I know that this is different to a great degree.<br>

but it shows legal principles.<br>

some theaters forbif bring in snacks or drinks.<br>

If it were a REAL policemen, It might be different.<br>

but a mall "cop" is not a real swaorn officer.<br>

I would take a few pictures of the mall "cop"<br>

"for the law suit or trial " and tell her to call the police immediately or I would.</p>

<p> </p>

[Damon DAmato]

<p>If this goes as usual, there will be a dozen different opinions and probably a borderline flame war before this thread is over. You'll hear all about politeness and how people treat other people and first amendment rights and color of law and what trespassing is as a term of art and whether or not your house is the same as a public space and copyright law and business espionage and on and on.</p>

<p>But there's one thing that I know is true-- those photographs were your personal property. That person coerced you to convert your personal property to something worthless-- an empty memory card. Might as well have simply asked for your wallet and taken money out.</p>

<p> </p>

[wayne_naughton]

<p>Personally, i keep out of malls.....grin. But, you can recover the photos, can't you?</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>An unfortunate consquence is that another security guard is given the impression that they can go around detaining people and then searching and even destroying their property. </p>

[spanky]

<p>My rule of thumb is whenever I plan on doing extensive shooting in an enclosed place were commerce or other business transactions are taking place, I try to talk to someone in charge prior to doing any actual shooting. Maybe it's just my good looks and untouchable charm (yeah right) but I've had very good sucess with this. I think those in charge would rather discuss the issue beforehand in a casual relaxed way then have to deal with a potential PR nightmare when one of their employees makes up their own rules. The guard in your situation was not the one in charge, she probably just thought she was. While I agree that she had no right to make you delete your pictures, I hope that others reading this thread will now be aware that they do not have to do this.</p><div></div>

[hugh_j.]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm an attorney, and the "public/private" issue is not as clear-cut as that. A mall is NOT the same as a private home; it's a public place where anyone can enter.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's not as clear cut as my simplified example, but it's not quite the way you think it is, either. Think of a mall as an open-house, or a home in which its owner is liquidating its contents. There are signs out on the street advertising a "moving sale," and in addition to the stuff for sale out in the yard and garage, visitors can take off their shoes and browse the home to see if they are interested in buying any of the furniture inside.</p>

<p>The house's owner can still eject any visitor for any reason, because a home, or a mall, is not a public park or a public street. Although the home is open by permission of the owner for visitors who want to come in to buy something, it's still private property.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /> Rules are posted at malls prohibiting firearms and smoking, so why is the "no photography" rule kept secret and wielded arbitrarily?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Because a mall is private property. As such, the owners and/or their representatives can arbitrarily enforce any rule they wish within the confines of the law. Don't like it? Leave. End of story. If you don't understand this, I don't know how you managed to pass your bar exam.</p>

[hugh_j.]

<blockquote>

<p>(And I should add, I'm a <em>non-practicing </em> attorney.)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>OK, that explains it.</p>

[hugh_j.]

<blockquote>

<p>Personally inviting guests over to your house is different from a corporation opening up a mall to the general public for the purpose of making a profit. You have a right not to invite black people or white people to your house. The mall owners don't have that same right.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And what do you think will happen if you separate your yard sale: stuff for "WHITES" on the lawn and inside the house, and "COLOREDS" have to browse on the curb? Look up the definition of "red herring." The issue here is private property vs. public property. A mall, and a home, are private property. A public park and a public street are not.</p>

[jim olson]

<p>Do you want to return to the mall or do you want to be banned. Maybe you should have gone to the mall office first to see what their policy is. How much time would that have taken? </p>

<p>jim</p>

[hugh_j.]

<blockquote>

<p>The photography rule at malls is one I am happy to break because it's nonsensical (and it's easy to get away with). Call me an anarchist.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In that case, I think you should refrain from giving anyone any advice in these types of scenarios. If you're not going to respect private property, then you are one of the reasons why the rest of us have to deal with these rules. As for the "nonsensical" comment - there are at least two reasons why photography is not allowed at malls.</p>

<p>1) Retailers spend a significant portion of their advertising budget on visual appeal to lure shoppers into their stores, and most if not all of their product, packaging and advertising designs are copyrighted. They have spent a great deal of money trying to do something unique, and they don't like the thought of their competitors from outside copying their ideas. Paranoid? Maybe, but they pay the rent, and therefore have leverage with the mall owners.</p>

<p>2) Malls are generally a family destination and people probably would prefer to shop in peace without photographers disturbing them or taking pictures of their daughters and children (if this is how they see it). If there is any risk that a certain behavior will disturb the shopping experience for the general public, you can bet there will be a rule against it - whether it be loitering, skateboarding, loud music, smoking, or - you guessed it - photography. If shoppers are being disturbed, whether in an actual or perceived way, then they leave, taking their money with them, and...</p>

<p>Makes more sense now? Not exactly rocket science.</p>