SDuffyPhotography.blog

PPG Policy Clarified? Not really.

I have one more update on the PPG fiasco and I suspect it might be the last one for a little while.

I found the email address and name of a person who is the Property Manager for Grubb-Ellis at PPG Place. After sending my initial email to her (pasted here), I received this response within an hour or two:

Shawn,

First I would like to apologize to you if one of our security officers did not treat you with respect when they allegedly approached you on the Plaza. The guard staff at PPG Place have been trained to represent the Complex as Ambassadors. This training is conducted annually.

As part of this training the staff is required to direct our camera systems toward anyone that they approach. Now that I am aware of the date, I have instructed our Manager of Security to research our vault for images. If the officer appears to have approached you in a way that contradicts our training procedures, the officer will be questioned and action taken if required.

We do have photography policies for PPG Place, the Plaza and connecting walkways as they are private property and clearly marked. We certainly will not prohibit anyone from capturing that ” Kodak Moment ” near the water feature or skating rink, however, we do have policies in place that restrict live footage or tripod photography that would include scanning the buildings, viewing the inter-lobbies or entrances. These are security measures that we feel are required, simply because we are a highly visible iconic landmark. Nor do we want a visible backdrop of the buildings to be used in advertising that challenges our principals or holds opposing views to the wholesome image we maintain.

Should you have a special request for photography at PPG Place, please feel free to contract me directly. We do review all requests on an individual basis.

Sincerely,

XXXXX XXXXXXX
Property Manager
PPG Place.

You can read my response after the jump…

Hi Susan,

I definitely appreciate your timely response. It’s not very common to come across courtesy such as yours when dealing with large companies. So, believe me, it is appreciated.

The time that I was told not to take photos (back in December 2006) the security guard was, indeed, very courteous and I immediately complied with his request that I not continue taking photos of the building. The most recent example was another photographer for whom I cannot speak.

However, my problem is not necessarily with the professionalism of your security guards, per se, but rather in the request itself. While I do not contest your policy on tripods (since they might present an obstruction to normal traffic) and photography within the buildings (since the interior of the building is not necessarily a public space), I do take issue with your policy of taking photos of the exterior of the buildings. While PPG Place is private property, it is also a public space. Photography in a public space of a public structure is clearly protected by US federal copyright law (see last email). The private property argument has further found to be irrelevant recently in Silver Spring, MD and Union Station, Washington, DC. There, photographers were told that they were not allowed to photograph the building because it was private property. When confronted with the law, the policy in both places was forcefully revoked and photographers’ rights to photograph were restored. And, as for your claim of “security”, there is not a single documented incident where a photo was taken of a potential terrorist target before an attack. Further, even in the fearful climate in which we currently find ourselves, not a single prohibition against photography of a public space in the name of security has withstood legal scrutiny.

With all due respect, I find your policy against photographing the exterior of PPG Place to be unreasonable, arbitrary, and in conflict with state and federal law.

Given your policy, can you please set some expectations regarding enforcement of the policy? For example, if a photographer were in PPG Place taking photos of the buildings, I’m assuming he/she would be told not to take photos. Can you please indicate what measures your guards are instructed to take if a photographer refuses to comply?

Also, if a photographer is across the street on public property taking photos of the buildings, what are the procedures if any (given that this is no longer private property) that your guards are instructed to follow for those photographers? Will they be told to cease their activities? And, if they do not?

I only ask because the policy, with regard to “security” (we’ve already established US copyright law specifically permits photos of public structures), would seem to be useless given that your private guards cannot interfere with photographers who are on public property. And if your intent is to call the Pittsburgh Police in these cases, can you please cite the law that such a photographer would be breaking and the grounds on which they can be asked to stop?

I am only asking these questions because I would like to definitively outline the rules so that expectations are clear for other photographers living in, and visiting, the Pittsburgh area who will inevitably want to photograph a structure as impressive as PPG Place.

I thank you very much for your time and I look forward to learning more about your photography policies.

Sincerely,

Shawn Duffy

After this response, all I received was an acknowledgment and an assurance that they would be reviewed for consideration.

I’m gonna let this one go for a little while and, perhaps, follow up in a week or two. After that, I may do a little further research, potentially reaching out to some folks in Pittsburgh. Who knows… I might just be tempted to organize a photowalk next time I’m in town.

Buy my photos!