Quote Originally Posted by Dave Parker
I happen to disagree, a private corperation that owns the property has the rights to do what they want when they deny access to the property, short of killing someone or maiming them, this is not a government situation, this from what I have read was a private corp dening access to photographers to their property...

I do know one thing, running around calling companies fascist, does not further our cause to have access to the areas we want to photograph, this is not even a 1st amendment thing, from the articles I have read, 100% in whole this is private property..

And I have worked for many corperations, and I agree that many are very militant in their thinking, I also spent 26 years in the military, so am very familier with the terms and definitions, but I can tell you this, if someone showed up on my personal private property and started taking photographs with out permission, they run a good chance of getting a butt full of rock salt from the 12 gauge..and here in Montana, I would win in court...personal private property rights are held in the highest reguards where I live.
Well, perhaps then, by the policies that are being instituted in this godforsaken country now - perhaps you ought to be preemptively locked up...! Seriously - you would want to KILL a person because they thought your house looked good enough to take a snapshot of?? Are you effing SERIOUS??

No landlord (corporation or otherwise) has any right to prevent someone standing on public property of taking pictures or video/film, what have you. Besides - why would they ever object unless they're doing something visibly illegal - which would be something of a telling sign, I'd think.

But usually - if one WANTS to take pictures while standing ON private property - it seems reasonable to me to request permission to do so. I think that is fine. A public transportation system, however - is far more of a grey zone.