no camera policy plus cameras in inventory equals hypocracy

[galland]

My family has shopped at Harris Teeter grocery stores since the late nineteen seventies. That ended today.

My mom was taking photographs of a friend who works in the flower department. A new manager (I'd never seen him before) decided to walk up and inform her that it was corporate policy that photography wasn't permitted without permission from corporate HQ. Needless to say, my mom was outraged. She let the manager know in no uncertain terms that she was offended and disgusted with his conduct. She demanded a written explanation from corporate HQ and informed him that we would never shop in HT grocery stores again.

True to her words, I ditched the grocery cart I had been filling up and walked out with her. I wasn't as mad as she was, but I got mad real fast. Harris Teeter has come under new ownership in the past year or two. Recently they installed security cameras in the isles. Apparently we aren't trusted to abstain from shoplifting! Not only did they install cameras in the isles, but Harris Teeter sells film and disposable cameras! I wish I would've thought of that when we were speaking to the manager.

If a business wants to prohibit photography I think it is their right to do so. But they shouldn't dare do it in a public area if photographic items are for sale or if there are security cameras present. That is the very height of hypocracy. It is offensive.

The end result, I imagine, is that we will become regular Food Lion customers. This might be for the best, as Food Lion products are cheaper. I've never encounted the "no pictures" rule while using cameras in a public place. I have to say that if someone pulled that nonsense on me, I'd point out their security cameras, their film display, and tell them to buzz off or call the cops. The PD in my area doesn't like to deal with silly things like this.

Galland

 

[galland]

It would appear I have not spelled hypocrisy correctly. Sorry about that.

 

[Greg Henry]

There's a reason the Harris Teeter stores went out of business in the Atlanta area, and it's for stuff like this.

It's neat to see a store with such an odd variety of items, but when you get a snotty attitude with it, it'll fail. Atlanta is an enormously huge retail and shoppers market. If you fail here, there's a reason for it and it's not due to a lack of population. I used to shop at one of them but figured it wasn't worth spending $8 on spaghetti sauce just to see neon lights and have a "personal cheff" toss a salad for me. LOL

Write a letter to their corporate HQ being nice, and explaining what happened. Hell, if you get bored go to the local consumer reporter at your local news station and see if they do those "this is going too far" stories. You might just get famous.

Greg.

My family has shopped at Harris Teeter grocery stores since the
late nineteen seventies. That ended today.

My mom was taking photographs of a friend who works in the flower
department. A new manager (I'd never seen him before) decided to
walk up and inform her that it was corporate policy that
photography wasn't permitted without permission from corporate HQ.
Needless to say, my mom was outraged. She let the manager know in
no uncertain terms that she was offended and disgusted with his
conduct. She demanded a written explanation from corporate HQ and
informed him that we would never shop in HT grocery stores again.

True to her words, I ditched the grocery cart I had been filling up
and walked out with her. I wasn't as mad as she was, but I got mad
real fast. Harris Teeter has come under new ownership in the past
year or two. Recently they installed security cameras in the isles.
Apparently we aren't trusted to abstain from shoplifting! Not only
did they install cameras in the isles, but Harris Teeter sells film
and disposable cameras! I wish I would've thought of that when we
were speaking to the manager.

If a business wants to prohibit photography I think it is their
right to do so. But they shouldn't dare do it in a public area if
photographic items are for sale or if there are security cameras
present. That is the very height of hypocracy. It is offensive.

The end result, I imagine, is that we will become regular Food Lion
customers. This might be for the best, as Food Lion products are
cheaper. I've never encounted the "no pictures" rule while using
cameras in a public place. I have to say that if someone pulled
that nonsense on me, I'd point out their security cameras, their
film display, and tell them to buzz off or call the cops. The PD in
my area doesn't like to deal with silly things like this.

Galland

 

[galland]

Write a letter to their corporate HQ being nice, and explaining
what happened. Hell, if you get bored go to the local consumer
reporter at your local news station and see if they do those "this
is going too far" stories. You might just get famous.

I suspect I will do exactly that. I've already emailed them to ask for the CEOs mailing address. I've worn my camera in the Fayetteville HT and nobody said a word to me. I understand they can't have folks traipsing about with tripods or lumbering with large format bellow cameras, but I think it is silly to prohibit legitimate customers from snapping pictures. If these rules had the force of law, our family outing photographs would be reduced to a bland series of people standing outside the doors of various commercial institutions.

Galland

 

[RickS]

(For our non-USA forum members, Harris Teeter and Food Lion are large grocery store chains in the USA.)

If you are complaining about a bad attitude from the manager, then you may have a beef (so to speak). However, if you're complaint is about not being able to take pictures in a public place, you're argument doesn't hold water.

The grocery store is not public property. It is a private business and as such can set any policies it wants as long as they don't break any laws. Try going into a mall sometime and start shooting snaps. Most likely you will be confronted by security and asked to leave. Once again, you're on private property.

These policies are there to protect their marketing copyrights, vendors, and protect their customer's right to privacy. I'm not saying I'm in agreement one way or the other but I know if I could expect to have my picture taken every time I went into a particular grocery store, I'd find a different one to shop in, something I'm sure Harris Teeter is trying to protect against. In general, people are not very comfortable about strangers taking their picture.

Have you inquired as to whether Food Lion will allow you take pictures in their store? Very unlikely.

This whole thing seems like a big overreaction to me.

Rick

 

[Ger Bee]

.... Christmas decorations in the local stores.

About two years ago we toddled around looking for anything new from the year before, we did the usual stuff and all was well, we are well known at this stage and all is great until we enter the ‘English Owned’ shopping complex on the quay (that’s in Cork).

We were surrounded by security, marched to the office had to wait ½ hour to see the manger, effectively under arrest and then we get a lecture about getting written permission before we start taking pictures.

We published all the stores in the city except that one and we have been in the store for five minutes since and we never turn up at their press briefings or launches and they phone almost weekly for us to cover something or another, but we have long memories and we routinely simply delete all references to this shopping centre since, except for the muggings, car park break ins and big brother camera stories (which never seem to see the criminals???) in which case we always feature their store, hehehee.

I personally shop in Dunne’s Stores, Cork, especially in their own complex (rather than as a tenant) in Bishopstown Court, have not had a problem and no one even looks twice at the gear, one needs to feel comfortable in these places, and taking a few photos is not doing any harm.

But stick to your guns, we left one shopping complex because they introduced a charge per trolley (shopping cart) but had only two return bays and not near the store’s entrances. I see they have moved them back and have re-introduced the mid park ones too, but too late, like you we discovered a lovely shopping complex and ironically a little cheaper too, so we won’t be back in a hurry, even after they fixed our grievances.

 

[Simon Courcha]

If the manager in question was less than polite then you'd have every right to be upset about that however, if the shop is private property into which members of the public are 'invited', then the owners are within their rights not to allow photography. And, it must be said, anyone who takes pictures without asking permission is guilty of 'impolite conduct'.

If you hosted a dinner party, and one of the guests suddenly got out a camera and started taking pictures of yourself, the other guests and your property without asking if it was ok, I suspect you might be a little irritated?

Simon C
http://www.eyematter.com

My family has shopped at Harris Teeter grocery stores since the
late nineteen seventies. That ended today.

My mom was taking photographs of a friend who works in the flower
department. A new manager (I'd never seen him before) decided to
walk up and inform her that it was corporate policy that
photography wasn't permitted without permission from corporate HQ.
Needless to say, my mom was outraged. She let the manager know in
no uncertain terms that she was offended and disgusted with his
conduct. She demanded a written explanation from corporate HQ and
informed him that we would never shop in HT grocery stores again.

True to her words, I ditched the grocery cart I had been filling up
and walked out with her. I wasn't as mad as she was, but I got mad
real fast. Harris Teeter has come under new ownership in the past
year or two. Recently they installed security cameras in the isles.
Apparently we aren't trusted to abstain from shoplifting! Not only
did they install cameras in the isles, but Harris Teeter sells film
and disposable cameras! I wish I would've thought of that when we
were speaking to the manager.

If a business wants to prohibit photography I think it is their
right to do so. But they shouldn't dare do it in a public area if
photographic items are for sale or if there are security cameras
present. That is the very height of hypocracy. It is offensive.

The end result, I imagine, is that we will become regular Food Lion
customers. This might be for the best, as Food Lion products are
cheaper. I've never encounted the "no pictures" rule while using
cameras in a public place. I have to say that if someone pulled
that nonsense on me, I'd point out their security cameras, their
film display, and tell them to buzz off or call the cops. The PD in
my area doesn't like to deal with silly things like this.

Galland

 

[galland]

If the manager in question was less than polite then you'd have
every right to be upset about that however, if the shop is private
property into which members of the public are 'invited', then the
owners are within their rights not to allow photography. And, it
must be said, anyone who takes pictures without asking permission
is guilty of 'impolite conduct'.

If you hosted a dinner party, and one of the guests suddenly got
out a camera and started taking pictures of yourself, the other
guests and your property without asking if it was ok, I suspect you
might be a little irritated?

Of course I wouldn't be irritated. Who am I to protest against someone I invited on my property? I'm not a wanted criminal or a convict and I don't associate with criminals. I have no desire or legitimate claim to be protected from photography in public places. In America a store floor is considered a public place. It's not as free as, say, a sidewalk, but prohibition of photography is not socially or morally acceptable here. Apparently this isn't the case in Britain. They might as well tack up "No Blacks" signs out front. It would be just as bad.

Galland

 

[galland]

(For our non-USA forum members, Harris Teeter and Food Lion are
large grocery store chains in the USA.)

If you are complaining about a bad attitude from the manager, then
you may have a beef (so to speak). However, if you're complaint is
about not being able to take pictures in a public place, you're
argument doesn't hold water.

In my neck of the woods it holds plenty of water. I've never been asked to stop taking pictures. Ever. My mom was the first unlucky family member to experience this insanity. We were not in an area of the building where people have an expectation of privacy.

The grocery store is not public property. It is a private business
and as such can set any policies it wants as long as they don't
break any laws. Try going into a mall sometime and start shooting
snaps. Most likely you will be confronted by security and asked to
leave. Once again, you're on private property.

The grocery store is a public place. It is private property, so you're half right on that point. And you are correct about stores setting policies. But they are just that- policies. They do not have the force of law behind them. This manager behaved as if he had the authority to tell my mom to put her camera away. Perhaps your local police gladly oblige the latest weird policy fetishes of your local corporate entities. Mine are constricted by the Constitution and a desire to devote their man hours to actual criminal acts.

These policies are there to protect their marketing copyrights,
vendors, and protect their customer's right to privacy.

I would agree with you if those policies did anything to protect their marketing copyrights, vendors, or their customers right to privacy. But it doesn't do any of those things. Please tell me how still photographs harm the above things when done at random along with purposely intrusive security cameras. And I have no problem with security cameras, in case you might wonder.

I'm not

saying I'm in agreement one way or the other but I know if I could
expect to have my picture taken every time I went into a particular
grocery store, I'd find a different one to shop in, something I'm
sure Harris Teeter is trying to protect against. In general, people
are not very comfortable about strangers taking their picture.

Said people are welcome to stay in their houses and never leave. I have no such expectation. I live in a free society and as such I don't expect any special treatment. It's none of my business if I happen to appear in photographs taken in public places.

Have you inquired as to whether Food Lion will allow you take
pictures in their store? Very unlikely.

Again, it is a public place. We were not in their back storage rooms, rest rooms or break rooms. The floor is a public place. That is the whole point of a store.

This whole thing seems like a big overreaction to me.

Yes, on their part. Photography has been around since the 1840s. And I am to believe it has just now become a potential threat to customer privacy and commercial trade? I think not.

Galland

 

[Jim Coffey]

The grocery store is a public place. It is private property, so
you're half right on that point. And you are correct about stores
setting policies. But they are just that- policies. They do not
have the force of law behind them. This manager behaved as if he
had the authority to tell my mom to put her camera away.

He does - you have no right to take photos on private property - if the store has a polocy against it, they have every right to ask you to stop, and if you refuse, to escort you out. And, quite frankly, if you would publish photos that conatined diplays, might even be able to sue you for copyright violations.

Bottom line - they are rquired to allow people to do what is normal in the course of business - but not open their property to any use simply becasue peopel have free access to the property.

Perhaps your local police gladly oblige the latest weird policy fetishes of
your local corporate entities.

I would expect them toi remove someone from my proiperty if they took pictures without my permission - why should a store expect less?

Mine are constricted by the
Constitution and a desire to devote their man hours to actual
criminal acts.

The US Constitution applies to government activities, not private ones; you have no more right to take photos on private property than you do to stand in the store and pass out fliers to shoppers.

As for selling cameras and film, Walmart sells guns and ammo but i doubt that they would lkike someone target shooting in the store.

 

[Iam3D]

http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

2nd header "the general rule"........ you have it a little backward galland, nothing can be done to you if you're on a public sidewalk, but if you are on private property, "public" or "private", they can ask you to stop taking pics.

That said, I think if i understand the original thread, your mom was taking pics of her friend making flower arrangements at the store, not randomly floating the aisles snapping away, right?

I think that i would definalty contact HQ about a managers "impolite attitude", but what is being considered rude here? the fact that he asked your mother to put away her camera, or was he yelling and threating right off the "git go"? (probably a transplant northerner who hasn't quite accepted the hospitality of the south eh? lol)

anyway G, i have printed copies of the link i supplied and carry a couple with me in my camera bag........ if the story from the original post is what happened, you really don't have a leg to stand on in this situation from a photography point of view........ sorry.

If the manager in question was less than polite then you'd have
every right to be upset about that however, if the shop is private
property into which members of the public are 'invited', then the
owners are within their rights not to allow photography. And, it
must be said, anyone who takes pictures without asking permission
is guilty of 'impolite conduct'.

If you hosted a dinner party, and one of the guests suddenly got
out a camera and started taking pictures of yourself, the other
guests and your property without asking if it was ok, I suspect you
might be a little irritated?

Of course I wouldn't be irritated. Who am I to protest against
someone I invited on my property? I'm not a wanted criminal or a
convict and I don't associate with criminals. I have no desire or
legitimate claim to be protected from photography in public places.
In America a store floor is considered a public place. It's not as
free as, say, a sidewalk, but prohibition of photography is not
socially or morally acceptable here. Apparently this isn't the case
in Britain. They might as well tack up "No Blacks" signs out front.
It would be just as bad.

Galland

--
If Some Is Good, More Is Better, And Too Much Is Just Right.
I live in my own little world. But it's OK ... they know me here

Pbase supporter http://www.pbase.com/shayfah

 

[Urn Itemare]

The store has every right to decide if you are or are not allowed to take pictures on their property. The fact that you are a customer does not give you an inaliable or constitutional right to take pictures on their property if they decide they do not want you to. They have every right to escort you, much to your indignation, off the premises if they so chose for any reason.

Go shop at Food Lion or any other grocery you want ot but stop whining about something that you are completely wrong about. They don't want you to take pictures go spend your money elsewhere. It serves them right to lose your business.

Urn

The grocery store is a public place. It is private property, so
you're half right on that point. And you are correct about stores
setting policies. But they are just that- policies. They do not
have the force of law behind them. This manager behaved as if he
had the authority to tell my mom to put her camera away. Perhaps
your local police gladly oblige the latest weird policy fetishes of
your local corporate entities. Mine are constricted by the
Constitution and a desire to devote their man hours to actual
criminal acts.

 

[Simon Courcha]

With all due respect, I don't know about the American legal system, but certain basic principles tend to apply in much of Western law - and one of the key principles is respect for private property. A private shop is private property in much the same way as your home is - it is certainly not regarded as a 'public' place. The owners of that property have certain rights with regard to it, just as you do with regards to your home. If they don't want you to take photographs within their private property then that's their right - as it is your right to ask people not to take photographs within the confines of your property without your permission. If you want to give your permission then fine, but it's up to your discretion. Why do you think that just because you've been invited in to a shop to carry out a transaction that gives you other rights over the owner's space?

The key here is the difference between public and private. I don't think you understand the difference. I believe you will find that in Britain we have much the same attitude towards our rights to photograph anything that is in the public domain.

Think about it. What's the alternative? The alternative is that private property owners don't have the right to exercise their discretion over what takes place on their property - providing the exercise of that discretion doesn't contravene another law. Such a state of affairs is a recipe for chaos.

If you feel so strongly about it then go do the research. I think you'll find that the store were within their rights.

Simon C
http://www.eyematter.com

If the manager in question was less than polite then you'd have
every right to be upset about that however, if the shop is private
property into which members of the public are 'invited', then the
owners are within their rights not to allow photography. And, it
must be said, anyone who takes pictures without asking permission
is guilty of 'impolite conduct'.

If you hosted a dinner party, and one of the guests suddenly got
out a camera and started taking pictures of yourself, the other
guests and your property without asking if it was ok, I suspect you
might be a little irritated?

Of course I wouldn't be irritated. Who am I to protest against
someone I invited on my property? I'm not a wanted criminal or a
convict and I don't associate with criminals. I have no desire or
legitimate claim to be protected from photography in public places.
In America a store floor is considered a public place. It's not as
free as, say, a sidewalk, but prohibition of photography is not
socially or morally acceptable here. Apparently this isn't the case
in Britain. They might as well tack up "No Blacks" signs out front.
It would be just as bad.

Galland

 

[Greg Henry]

And your experience is not alone either....

Here is one I had at a new shopping center in my area - link is below as a story I posted on my web site.

http://www.thepowderspringspost.com/avenue.htm

Greg

-----

Write a letter to their corporate HQ being nice, and explaining
what happened. Hell, if you get bored go to the local consumer
reporter at your local news station and see if they do those "this
is going too far" stories. You might just get famous.

I suspect I will do exactly that. I've already emailed them to ask
for the CEOs mailing address. I've worn my camera in the
Fayetteville HT and nobody said a word to me. I understand they
can't have folks traipsing about with tripods or lumbering with
large format bellow cameras, but I think it is silly to prohibit
legitimate customers from snapping pictures. If these rules had the
force of law, our family outing photographs would be reduced to a
bland series of people standing outside the doors of various
commercial institutions.

Galland

 

[Greg Henry]

I think the conditions warrant different levels of enforcement. Example... if someone is in a grocery store and is taking a photo of an employee who they know who works there, then I think the management should have enough COMMON SENSE to allow this. If however, the person is just walking around the inside of the store taking photos of the displays and items, then yes, he has a right to approach that person and ask what/why/where, etc. etc.

I posted above, but I'll repost - below is a link to a story I did on my web site about an experience I had at a local shopping center (they call it an "open air mall") that recently opened in my area. What made this particular incident so odd was that is was the grand opening weekend for this center, and they readily boast about how different the design of it is (it's designed to look like a main street of a small town, etc.) yet did not expect anyone to show up to take photos. Anyway.. you can read about it here: http://www.thepowderspringspost.com/avenue.htm

I do understand what some folks are saying about "private vs. public" property. However, I still argue that there will be times when management and owners need to pay particular attention to the circumstances regarding an event. For instance - the man who was taken in for taking photos of Christmas displays. It's CHRISTMAS - people do tend to take photos during this time of year, and it SHOULD be considered a compliment that folks want to take photos of your store displays and decorations. If you don't want them to, then don't decorate. A grand opening of a shopping center. Ok, fine, you don't want photos taken... but what do you expect on a grand opening weekend where there is entertainment, street clowns, etc. ?? A grocery store... a photo taken of an employee someone knows? Come on.

Again, I do understand the idea behind restricting photography on private property under the right circumstances. Let's just try to stop the level of insanity and paranoia that is beginning to happen under certain occasions.

Greg

.... Christmas decorations in the local stores.

About two years ago we toddled around looking for anything new from
the year before, we did the usual stuff and all was well, we are
well known at this stage and all is great until we enter the
‘English Owned’ shopping complex on the quay (that’s in Cork).

We were surrounded by security, marched to the office had to wait ½
hour to see the manger, effectively under arrest and then we get a
lecture about getting written permission before we start taking
pictures.

We published all the stores in the city except that one and we have
been in the store for five minutes since and we never turn up at
their press briefings or launches and they phone almost weekly for
us to cover something or another, but we have long memories and we
routinely simply delete all references to this shopping centre
since, except for the muggings, car park break ins and big brother
camera stories (which never seem to see the criminals???) in which
case we always feature their store, hehehee.

I personally shop in Dunne’s Stores, Cork, especially in their own
complex (rather than as a tenant) in Bishopstown Court, have not
had a problem and no one even looks twice at the gear, one needs to
feel comfortable in these places, and taking a few photos is not
doing any harm.

But stick to your guns, we left one shopping complex because they
introduced a charge per trolley (shopping cart) but had only two
return bays and not near the store’s entrances. I see they have
moved them back and have re-introduced the mid park ones too, but
too late, like you we discovered a lovely shopping complex and
ironically a little cheaper too, so we won’t be back in a hurry,
even after they fixed our grievances.

 

[NNS]

I'm an avid amateur photographer amd I enjoy taking pictures at various places including art/craft fairs. The only time I've ever been asked to stop taking photo's was at an arts and craft show. I suppose they are afraid I will use their work for some type of gain which is not the case but how would they know that.

In this instance Gallard, You were on "private" property. A store is not a turly public place such as a city park or a sidewalk. They have the right to say no photography inside the store.

The manager could have handled it better and not made you and your mom to feel like unwanted guests. If they had bettery explained their policy and reasoning, would you have been less angry?

I too get frustrated because I like to take pictures everywhere. I have to exercise common sense and observe ediquette in various situations.

If you were taking pictures of products and prices etc, I could see where the mgr would have been more "right" but in either case, it's their store.

BTW, the police will never get involved in a situation like this unless you and the manager were in a fight over it. It's a civil problem entirely.

 

[Craig Gillette]

I'm an avid amateur photographer amd I enjoy taking pictures at
various places including art/craft fairs. The only time I've ever
been asked to stop taking photo's was at an arts and craft show. I
suppose they are afraid I will use their work for some type of gain
which is not the case but how would they know that.

In this instance Gallard, You were on "private" property. A store
is not a turly public place such as a city park or a sidewalk.
They have the right to say no photography inside the store.

The manager could have handled it better and not made you and your
mom to feel like unwanted guests. If they had bettery explained
their policy and reasoning, would you have been less angry?

I too get frustrated because I like to take pictures everywhere. I
have to exercise common sense and observe ediquette in various
situations.

If you were taking pictures of products and prices etc, I could see
where the mgr would have been more "right" but in either case, it's
their store.

BTW, the police will never get involved in a situation like this
unless you and the manager were in a fight over it. It's a civil
problem entirely.

Actually once you fail to comply with the legitimate requests of the owner/management, it can become a criminal matter, trespassing. Handled poorly by the manager? Maybe (but given the frantic response by these two, I have my doubts) but quite legal.