Taking photographs while on scene

[Guest TFD125]

I am not looking to start a thread full of speculation and everyone's opinion. I am hoping someone can give me the LEGAL answer.

If a Fire Fighter, Police Officer, EMT (volunteer or career) etc... is operating in an official capacity with their agency at an incident and they take pictures on their camera, phone, ipod whatever can they post those images online or freely distribute those images any way they please?

I did see a thread about this, but it got a lot into peoples opinion, morals, speculation then somehow paid vs volley haha.

However, legally he way I understood this is if you are operating in official capacity and take the pictures they technically belong to they agency you are working for. Basically saying that you can not distribute them without the permission of the agency.

I appreciate any educated responses. Thanks in advance.

[KC2OBW 1]

I think that would fall under department guidelines, like it might be ok with one dept, but another dept might say no, I would check with a chief officer before taking any pics of a scene. You'll be surprised how much trouble some will get into over one picture.

[223Truck 0]

Well in my opinion I think there is a legal issue. Depends what the picture is of, of course. I think you can get yourself in quite a bind if you have pictures of victims or motor vehicle accidents with license plates in view. Especially of a fatal scene, they do try to restrict access to it for a reason, and a emergency services person has more access then others.Plus just out of respect for familes who lost loved ones. Sounds like a tough issue though. Just my 10 cents!

[OnTheWheel 43]

Your best bet is to not take pictures, why you would is beyond me. (at a crime scene that is or an accident etc.)

Edited July 28, 2009 by OnTheWheel

[Guest Photounit]

I know you don't want speculation but what you need is to find some case law.... In other words find some cases that were tried in court and what the rulings were....

As far as I know these are a few accurate scenarios..... If you are being paid to be on the scene, then your employer technically owns the photo's because you took them on their time(They were paying you) and thus could tell you what could or could not be done with them....... If you are not paid and use your own equipment, and your department has no official regulation on photography, you own the photo's and can technically do what you want with them. If you use their equipment they MAY be able to argue that they have rights to the photo's and thus control of their distribution because they facilitated the capture of the photo's by letting you use their equipment ...... But if your department has regulations against taking "personal" photo's and /or distributing them, then you are subject to following these rules whether you are paid or not..............

I have a book somewhere that I don't have access to right now that spelled some of this out....... Here's a link to a Kodak article that talks about "who owns what". It cites a studio photographer who takes photo's as an employee of a studio as an example but it can be applied to the position of a police, firefighter, or EMS person......

http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/en/con...copyright.shtml

You may remember this photo

Copyright 2000 - Bureau of Land Management

The photo was taken by an employee of The Bureau of Land Management and thus they owned the copyright on the photo and as a result, he was unable to profit from it. However, he did get credit for the photo which is outstanding IMO.

Here's a little blurb about the photo.....

http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/deerfire.asp#photo

The one thing that comes up a lot is the subject of graphic images....... Auto accidents, fire victims, etc....... Technically, if you take a photo of the same and it was taken in "plain open view" and you needed no special access to take the photo, then you can take the photo and do what you want with it and no, the Police can't stop you although they will probably try......... In other words a press photographer, the public, etc standing at a fire line can openly see the subject and photograph it, it's fair game....... It turns into a moral issue as to what you do with the photo(s)....... Can you post these photo's on the net, sure...... There are plenty of sites on the net that cater to this crap....Could you get sued for publishing the photo's on the Internet? Yes....... You can get sued for anything......... How many of these images have you seen on the front page of the POST...... How about the photo's of the deceased children from the Our lady of Angels Fire which can be found here: http://www.olafire.com/Gallery.asp that not only showed the victims, but identified them by name...... Technically it's not illegal to take or post these images....... However, the grey area for us as emergency service personnel is that of having "special access" to take these photo's and the not so grey area to me is why would we want to take these photo's and circulate them publicly and perhaps cause more emotional stress to those who have lost a loved one..... I know of several recent incidents where FF's took photo's of deceased and circulated them ..... Why? In one instance a blanket order came down that NO ONE was allowed to take photographs of anything while they were on the job as result...... This one individual ruined it for everybody and these types of incidents are why departments paid and volunteer are finding it necessary to impose restrictions on photography.....

Edited July 28, 2009 by Photounit

[helicopper 1,050]

I would strongly recommend that you consult with your agency and obtain an opinion from legal counsel, preferably the agency or municipality's attorney - not just an opinion from a "Firehouse/Jailhouse/EMS House lawyer" or even the Chief Officer. I've asked in the past what agencies have written policies about this and the responses (or lack thereof) seem to indicate that most have agencies have no policy on the subject.

If you're operating within a crime scene/accident scene or in/on private property and the photos are not taken pursuant to your official duties you may be exposing yourself to liability. If you're in my house because of an emergency call and photography is not part of your official duties, you may need to obtain my permission before taking the photos. The same may be true of other government or quasi-government properties (the Thruway comes to mind; they have special rules and regulations).

I would also suggest that it depends on your motivation at the time. If you're taking a quick picture to show the ED staff the mechanism of injury there's probably no big problem. If you're taking photos for a commercial purpose (publication/sale/etc.) there may be more issues regardless of your status - paid/volunteer/on-duty/off-duty/etc.

I don't know that receiving a paycheck is the only criteria for your employer (paid or volunteer) owning the photos! If you're using your position to gain access to a scene, the photos may also belong to the employer. This is why a lawyer's guidance is needed!

None of this constitutes the LEGAL advice you're seeking and I strongly urge you to obtain true legal counsel before putting yourself out there regardless of the responses in this thread. Given the proliferation of photo equipment and ease of wide distribution of such photos, I would also recommend that agencies adopt a policy concerning photos by members of their department while at a scene to protect them from future liability.

[ny10570 745]

There are no legal restrictions to taking photos while on duty (paid or volunteer) nor to using your status as a member of an organization to take any photos. You two issues are going to be your agency and civil suits. The magic term they can use to get you in civil court is breech of public trust. You're granted special access just by being a member of one of these emergency service agencies and using that access in way not intended by the public you're open to a civil suit.

There's a case heading to court soon in NYC after a retired ESU detective while working as a Richmond University Medical Center EMT photographed a suicide victim and posted it on facebook. There's a laundry list of legal actions coming out of this, one of which is an action against the EMT for a yet undisclosed amount of cash.

[Guest TFD125]

I must say these are some of the best responses I've read on this forum in a while. It's nice to get some very well thought out educated answers.

I was not asking because I want to take pictures and distribute/sell them. I was asking more on the part of being a LT and wanting to make sure that we are responsible within our own department with personal pictures. Especially now that everyone has a camera phone. I believe there is a huge moral obligation to the images we take on scene especially in the case of a fatality, severe injury, incendiary fire, crime scene etc... I was curious what the legal look at it was.

I know civilian photography is mostly unregulated as long as you are taking pictures from a public place and not zooming into someones window with some exceptions of course (trademark infringement, peeping tom etc..). I just was not sure exactly how that pertained to us because we are responding as professionals (volunteer or paid) and we are held to a higher standard than a civilian in just about everything we do. Not to mention we have access to areas that civilians may not.

I had the right idea, but wanted to verify and see if anyone had personal experience with any of these problems. I do think that every department should at the very least have an SOP, guideline or some sort of WRITTEN regulation regarding cameras on scene and even speaking to the press. IMO you should not be able to share photos, or even discuss details of an incident with press without prior authorization from the organization you are representing. We have seen it too many times, once we join we are no longer Joe Blow from around the corner you are now firefighter, emt, officer so 'n so from your agency. You now represent your entire agency and field when you open your mouth or do something.

Don't get me wrong I don't plan on becoming a photo czar for the department and not allowing anything to get anywhere. I don't see the problem with the occasional buff shots for facebook or your firehouse's website, but within good taste and you need to make sure you cover your @$$. However, I do feel that certain photos of even a car after a fatal accident (no victims inside, just the car) should not be published by us for the world to see, let the vultures in the press stoop down to that level. Or say during overhaul some guys are taking a picture of themselves in the house/office whatever. They may not be aware that C&O has determined the fire to be incendiary and those pictures are unintentionally showing/leaking evidence for an ongoing investigation.

As far as receiving a paycheck constitutes you as being employed, I am almost positive that in NY state volunteer agencies are considered employers even though we are not receiving a paycheck. They are held to the same/similar standards as other companies in regards to labor laws etc...

Thanks again guys much appreciated!

Now lets get back to volley/paid/bluelight/ppe/dot vest bashing haha just kidding.

Edited July 28, 2009 by TFD125

[helicopper 1,050]

There are no legal restrictions to taking photos while on duty (paid or volunteer) nor to using your status as a member of an organization to take any photos. You two issues are going to be your agency and civil suits. The magic term they can use to get you in civil court is breech of public trust. You're granted special access just by being a member of one of these emergency service agencies and using that access in way not intended by the public you're open to a civil suit.

I don't know if I agree with your blanket statement about no legal restrictions and using membership status to gain access to a location where the public is not permitted. Trespass immediately comes to mind and if you're from the NJ FD and are buffing a fire in the NY FD's area and someone makes a stink you could be charged with trespass - a legal restriction. I'd have to review the statutes but I also think you could get yourself jammed up if you're using department ID to access a scene to which your agency has not been requested. Civil liability is also a major concern and probably a greater exposure than criminal.

I'm going to again say there could be legal restrictions and you should consult agency counsel when drafting a policy on the subject.

[NWFDMedic 58]

Your best bet is to not take pictures, why you would is beyond me. (at a crime scene that is or an accident etc.)

Every once in a while, I will take a picture of an accident to bring to the hospital. That's generally only if there is a particular mechanism that I want the doctor and trauma surgeons to see.

[JetPhoto 626]

Well in my opinion I think there is a legal issue. Depends what the picture is of, of course. I think you can get yourself in quite a bind if you have pictures of victims or motor vehicle accidents with license plates in view. Especially of a fatal scene, they do try to restrict access to it for a reason, and a emergency services person has more access then others.Plus just out of respect for familes who lost loved ones. Sounds like a tough issue though. Just my 10 cents!

Publishing a photo of a license plate - There is no secret to a license plates on a vehicle in a auto accident - Most of the time it's in plain view - unless you have access to the motor vehicle database you can't find out who owns it (if you did you maybe violating the law disclose the information and this may or may not be the victim) The plate is very rarley removed due to an accident (unless other circumstances warrent it) It can also be read when the tow truck takes it away.

So I ask, Why can't you take pictures of a license plate?

Edited July 28, 2009 by JetPhoto

[ny10570 745]

Sorry, I should have been more clear. There absolutely repercussions concerning the physical space you occupy. I was simply referring to the photos one would take.

[Remember585 815]

For all of the incident photos I have ever taken, I never publish a victim's face, a license plate # or anyone's face that isn't a part of the organization(s) involved. I've gone as far as blurring out the faces of undercover cops who were assisting other officers at incidents, just to keep them "anonymous."

I also try to avoid showing body bags, blankets covering a body and blood. There's really no reason to show this, in my opinion. It's tasteless.