Photographing boats and permission needed?

Athena wrote: I've never heard that you can't photograph boats or cars for that matter.  Just buildings that are owned by government. 

I won't even ask about municipal/county/state/federal distinctions.

No, that's incorrect. A quick web search will make that clear.

www.thoughtco.com/legality-of-photograph...al-buildings-3321820

+1 Rather surprised too, didn't know about boats.

Gary is it necessary to say to people like Scott and Kelly that what they posted is irrelevant? I think it's a valid point that even if it's legal to stand on a dock or sidewalk taking photos of someone's houseboat, it would get rude and inconsiderate at some point to keep doing so - if someone lives there maybe they don't want to be bothered. It can be necessary to consider usage so you know if you're going to need to ask the boat owner to sign a property release or not.

That article linked gives no footnotes and doesn't cite any sources to know where the person who wrote it got the information. So I don't know that you can assume it's correct.

icepics wrote: Gary is it necessary to say to people like Scott and Kelly that what they posted is irrelevant? I think it's a valid point that even if it's legal to stand on a dock or sidewalk taking photos of someone's houseboat, it would get rude and inconsiderate at some point to keep doing so - if someone lives there maybe they don't want to be bothered. It can be necessary to consider usage so you know if you're going to need to ask the boat owner to sign a property release or not.

That article linked gives no footnotes and doesn't cite any sources to know where the person who wrote it got the information. So I don't know that you can assume it's correct.

I should get myself a service mark registration for "correcting misinformation one post at a time."

If someone conflates, then what words, precisely, would be appropriate to point out that someone is bringing into the conversation something that really has nothing to do with it (the conversation)?

If you perceive the word "irrelevant" as provocative, there's not much I can do about that. According to thesaurus.com its synonyms include "off the topic", "not pertaining to" and "unrelated". I suppose I could use "unrelated" just as easily.

I believe the OP's issue was the legality of taking photographs. Not whether it was annoying (conflation). Nor the potential usage of said photographs (again, conflation). Just taking photographs. I'm not suggesting that these other issues are not important, just that one should keep the issues separate in order to arrive at the truth of the matter. E.g. no one has explained how needing a property release has anything to do with snapping the shutter. Because you don't.

And because what's really inappropriate is presuming that we get to walk around telling people what they can and cannot do. Like the guy at the boat dock. I continue to maintain that he was out of line, period.

I don't post links to articles in order to claim they are the final word on a matter. I do so to illustrate that doing a search on the web can lead one to more and more detailed information about a subject. In this instance, one could read that short summation then search for "musumeci sued the department of homeland security" and immediately find links to the court documents. One could then read further about the case and its outcome. As opposed to dismissing it (the article) because it doesn't meet preconceptions of veracity.

Oh, and just to be clear: nowhere have I suggested that what someone posted is irrelevant. My points, if read carefully, are about trying to introduce factors into a discussion when they have no place there. That's not the same thing.

I should turn this into a blog post.... if I had a blog.

Lots of sparks over taking some pictures. If someone asked me not to photograph something, I'd probably oblige...but lots depends on that, no two circumstances are the same. Attitude (how they ask) means a lot and if I know I'm in the right taking them, I'd probably respond, "take a hike". I didn't read all the wordy responses, but if the person whose boat I was on was good, I'm snapping away....

As I know it; whether private or public property - there are always rules that apply.
By entering the place you normally accept those rules. If they say "no photography" you shouldn't be making any photos. If those rules don't mention photography you are free to make photos. If the rules say "permit needed for photography" you aply for a permit - or you don't shoot! What you do with the photos afterwards is a different story......

 I would've gone back and just taken the photo. 

huh, never heard of something like that happening. people get defensive around cameras though