Taking pictures at parks?

party on to that sean... thats right... i have never been to WoA so i cant comment on their policys... i am just tryin to help ya guys understand the other side of this topic...;)... and i am with you guys on thinkin that WoA('s policys) is wack from what i have heard... so yea... and sean you were talking about not reading anywhere that you cant take pics of the logo or somthing.... when you go to WoA do they had ya park broshures when ya get a parking stub out in the lot? when you go to the ticket booths? when ya go through the park turnstyles? look in that... find the fine print... i am sure you will find somthing about the pic policy in there :P

In other words, your guilty before proven innocent. If your taking pictures, you COULD sell them, so some parks say "no" if you have a professional looking camera? THATS LAME! Just for reference, what is Cedar Points's policy?

I'm not positive, I havn't been to CP YET!, but judging on how many pictures there are of CP, I doubt it is illegal.. But I don't think they allow you to take pictures on the ride, but I'm not absolutley sure on any of this.

Does anybody know if the policy for one SF park is the same for all? I was planning on taking photos of the construction of whatever SFEG is going to build, but not sure if I am going to now. There is another thread about this, it seems all this is steming from SFWoA.

If a park didn't allow you to take pictures they would be absolutely stupid. Photos are great promotion for their park. If I owned a park I would want everyone to take pictures, show them to all their friends and hopefully post them on the Internet on Amusement park sites. That way people would want to come. It is free advertisement.
-----------------
Mike Middleton of Urbana, Indiana

Wabash Cannonball said:
If a park didn't allow you to take pictures they would be absolutely stupid. Photos are great promotion for their park. If I owned a park I would want everyone to take pictures, show them to all their friends and hopefully post them on the Internet on Amusement park sites. That way people would want to come. It is free advertisement.
-----------------
Mike Middleton of Urbana, Indiana

That is very true, if I was trying to decide an out-of-town visit to a amusement park, the first thing I would do is go to the internet, check out pictures and stats. It is free advertisement, that is a great point right there that you made.

Six Flag's policy is that you are lot allowed to take cameras or any other loose articles on the rides... the reason why there are still on ride pics is that the attendants didn't see the camera (rider snuck it on). I can't believe some parks allow patrons to take picstures on the ride, as was said earlier, when you're moving about 50 or 60 mph, and something flies out of your hand and hits someone, it makes for a really nasty incident (I have experienced this firsthand).

Sometimes we would see wise guys pull their cameras out as a train was being dispatched, like we couldn't stop them at that point. So we'd stop the train on the lift and take it away, and everyone in line and on the ride was consequently pretty irate at the rule-breaker.

I know most people hold on to their stuff pretty good, but because some people don't, you have to have rules like that.

On-property photography policy is whatever the park wants. Seeing as how these are places that people take vacations, no park in their right mind (except apparently SFWOA) is going to stop you on the midway and interrogate you.

Now, it's quite another thing when you want to use the photo in some commercial application. I've been approached many times about using CP photos for printed publication, and I always refer the publisher to the park, as I don't have a property release. I suppose it could be argued that my photos on GTTP are for commercial use (still waiting for that profit, thanks), but I digress.

Now, when you are off-property, all bets are off. You can take any photo you want.

Then again, there's the issue of commercial use. If legal stuff bores the hell out of you, skip to the next post now.

A few years ago the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum sued a photographer for selling posters of the Rock Hall. If you've never been there, it's a pretty public building. I could see it from my downtown office window everyday at one of my jobs. In any case, the hall said that the building itself was one of their trademarks (designed by I.M. Pei), and that distributing photos of it can confuse the marketplace into thinking it's an official product. The confusion thing is one of the key issues in defending a trademark.

While White Castle apparently won a similar case decades earlier for their burger joints, the judge ruled in favor of the photographer apparently because she felt you couldn't trademark a landmark. So while there is now contradictory case law here, I'm betting that any use of such photos, especially if taken from public property, if fair game.

Why? Well, look at Six Flags advertising. The company itself considers their rides indistinguishable from each other from park to park, so they use the same rides in their TV and print ads (not to mention brochures) regardless of the actual park. Bottom line is that they don't consider their rides unique enough to bother considering them trademarks of the individual parks. Even if they wanted to, color aside, can the non-enthusiast eye compare two B&M's and really know the difference enough to cause confusion in the market place? Take it another step and consider cloned rides, like SLC's. It would be absurd.

So there's my take on it. I suppose you're at their mercy inside the park, but not from the outside.

-------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com, Sillynonsense.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe, there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

flightoffear29withinblocks: You are incorrect. The rider responsibility law does not specifically address on-ride photography, only park rules. The parks sets the rules (and can make exceptions), not the law.

-------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com, Sillynonsense.com
"As far as I can tell it doesn't matter who you are. If you can believe, there's something worth fighting for..." - Garbage, "Parade"

Correction: In Ohio, on-ride photography is only a violation of ORC 1711.551 if the rider is not complying with the printed or verbal instructions given by the park or ride operator. If the park permits the rider to take on-ride photos, then the rider is not in violation of any statute when shooting photos.
That said, Kings Island's policy forbids on-ride photography, and therefore taking pictures on board PKI's rides would constitute a violation of ORC 1711.551.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Who has quite a bit of *legal* on-ride video shot in Ohio.

http://www.photosecrets.com/p14.html

Perhaps that will be of some use to you all?

After reading that, however, the question becomes - Is a roller coaster considered a building or a monument?

-----------------
~~~ M ~~~
Official Driver for the Long Island Regional.

Neither, Chernabog. It's private property. The same as the stuff in my house. Just because I'd invite you in, doesn't give you the right to take pictures of all of my stuff.

Here's a similar link to Chernabog's that spells it out a little better:

http://www.indexstock.com/photographers/PRguides.htm

The confusion seems to be that roller coasters could realistically fall into several of the categories listed on this link. Private property? Indeed, so it's a no-no. Famous landmark or location? Sure, to some degree so it's ok? Corporate logo or insignia? These rides and themes are trademarked by the parks so again it seems no.

Heck, with a little creative wording you could probably fit coasters into a few other categories on that page. Still think the bottom line is that the parks are the private property of the companies that own them as as long as you're on that property, you obey their rules.

-----------------
www.coasterimage.com

You also see Seaworld and Busch Gardens:

http://www.indexstock.com/photographers/trademark.htm

-----------------
CP! Still the coaster capital of the world in 2002!
My fellow Americans; Let's Roll!
WoodenCoaster.com

It appears all of those links generally are addressing the commercial use of the photographs. If it is your personal use, it seems that it is ok.

Funkytones,

As a matter of fact, I did look for the 'fine print" in everything you listed., and then some That was my problem, since there is NO policy listed on anything I read or saw, I didn't understand it. I would have no problem if the park put up a sign stating that taking pictures while inside was illegal. I can follow rules easily as long as they are posted somewhere.

When I went to guest relations, the woman did say that the rule was printed in the brochure. I grabbed a brochure and asked her to please show me where it states that. The only things it stated was copying the Six Flags logo in any way is illegal, and they 'may' have been a mention that on ride photography and photoghraphy while in line for a ride is prohibited. Once again, I have no problem following those rules, but I wasn't in a ride line, I wasn't in a restricted area, and I wasn't breaking any listed rules. The woman then told me that I should not have been harrassed by employees as long as I was following rules and such a photo policy does not exsist.

The exact quote I got from a girl near Superman was ," You either put that camera away or you will get thrown out of the park". Funny thing was, I wasn't even taking pictures of the ride at the time and just had the camera around my neck. This was near the Sky Cabin (or whatever it's called).

To this day, I have yet to hear of another park that has an odd, non consistant, photo policy.

-Sean

sean...

hmm... maybe like a "riders safety guide" or somthing which goes into more detail the qualifications for each and every ride... i dunno what the SF version of that is called... it may have somthing in there... since i hear the sfwoa is just anal about it they must have it typed out somewhere... and employees shouldnt be doing that... i mean... regular employees do that... i mean like confronting you about stuff like that... should call in security or somthing... ahh well...

It's never happened to me. I have been to SFNE quite a lot to take photos of construction (expect new ones in a few days), and I usually go into a nieghborhood that puts you 50 yards from SROS's overbank turn. No police officers have ever stopped or asked me what I was doing, but the nieghbors of the park get a little mad to see strangers driving in to take photos.