Comments on: Shopping center that banned photographer received at least $6 million in tax-money

By: Steve A

Steve A — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 04:31:59 +0000

Great comments, you have certainly stirred passion in your readers, very helpful!
Steve A´s last blog ..Desperately seeking COBRA subsidy

By: Personalized Dog Tags

Personalized Dog Tags — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 00:14:35 +0000

I find it very irritating that people get so worked up about their picture being taken. I mean really, what do they think people are going to do with it! Are they really that full of themselves that they think they are too cool to be photographed? Imagine what the world would be like if everyone had been like that since the invention of photographs. It would be sad, and bleak, and we would have nothing to “literally look back on!” Wow, I didn’t know I cared so much about this!
Personalized Dog Tags´s last undefined ..Response cached until Sun 6 @ 1:05 GMT (Refreshes in 23.88 Hours)

By: Info & Shopping Site

Info & Shopping Site — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 11:27:17 +0000

Toby’s coffee for me, smooth, strong & creamy!

By: Matthew Lane

Matthew Lane — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:51:50 +0000

But i’d be happy to see what else you want to assume. This could be a fun little game.

By: Matthew Lane

Matthew Lane — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:50:00 +0000

Not even nearly.

By: Matthew Lane

Matthew Lane — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:42:04 +0000

Don’t be an arse they did a pretty decent job of reporting the facts… a hell of a lot better then it was reported here… Consumerist gave both sides of the argument, even if it does focus on the malls side a bit more (which is not at all surprising considering there demographic is probably not photographers).

On reflection this Blog did not focus on anything other then “Big bad mall picking on first amendment rights of poor little photographers.”

By: Matthew Lane

Matthew Lane — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:36:10 +0000

WOW. I wouldn’t have pointed that out. Other then the fact that alot of people here are basically preforming cyber harrasment due to something that does not directly effect them.

I wouldn’t have posted that just for common sense reasons. Seriously… if someone starts harrassing them via phone because you pointed this out & they happen to be able to prove they’ve been on this site, you can get into a lot of trouble. America has some pretty harsh cyber-harassment laws in place these days. Just be careful of what you post.

Not being a bully or anything, just giving a warning, you might think its a victimless crime or that they deserve it, but you can ruin peoples lives like that & thats not cool.

By: Matthew Lane

Matthew Lane — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:31:02 +0000

Exactly! Those rights go both ways.

By: NYCPhotorights

NYCPhotorights — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:53:44 +0000

FACT: The Burlington Police intimidated and harassed this photographer by questioning him at his place of business for 45 minutes. THAT is harassment since photography is NOT a crime!

FACT: The Universal Trespass Law has been abused in the past to take vengeance upon a man who fought for and WON a back pay award against one of the stores. The message there was very clear – don’t take one of our stores to court over your paycheck or we will ban you from shopping and/or ever getting another job anywhere in this area.

The issue of the constitutionality of those universal trespass orders and the complicity of the government in enforcing them without due process is much bigger than one store vs. one photographer. THAT is the real story here.
NYCPhotorights´s last blog ..Burlington Vermont Forces Photographer to Quit Hobby