John West proudly displays his NPPA affiliation while covering protests during the DNC. Photo by Mickey H. Osterreicher

One could easily imagine that, after seeing how well things went during the RNC in Tampa, that members of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) might have let their guard down as the DNC began.  To the contrary, officers there remained on high alert throughout the convention and made use of every available resource to ensure that the DNC would go just as smoothly.

Mark Newbold, Deputy City Attorney for CMPD, said that after inclement weather deterred protestors at the RNC, CMPD officers were prepared for an increase in DNC protests.  While the number of protestors stayed below their expectations, Newbold said that his department’s preparedness allowed those who did come to protest to do so with limited police involvement.

“Most of the protestors, even the rowdy ones, have been willing to comply,” Newbold said.  “The main focus of the police is that we don’t focus on speech, we focus on criminal behavior.  You can say and do what you want as long as you don’t take violent acts against people or property.”

Protestors take a break in the middle of the street during the DNC. Photo by Mickey H. Osterreicher

While the CMPD sought to create an open environment for demonstrations, several protestors were arrested during the convention.  However, no journalists were arrested, a fact that Newbold credits in large part to NPPA General Counsel Mickey Osterreicher, who came to Charlotte in April to help educate and train officers regarding First and Fourth Amendment rights.  Newbold said the work of the department and the NPPA helped to create understanding between journalists and police rather than confrontation.

“After things went as well as they did in Tampa I was concerned that the coverage of the protests in Charlotte might be more problematic, but fortunately the feedback I received was that the police were extremely professional, cordial  and accommodating in both cities,” Osterreicher said. “It is a credit to the Tampa and Charlotte-Mecklenburg police departments that they were not only willing to embrace the idea of allowing the media to do their jobs but that they properly trained officers from so many other agencies to adopt and adhere to that policy,” he added.

Just like during the NATO Summit in Chicago, where Superintendent Gary McCarthy led his officers and in Tampa, where Police Chief Jane Castor and Hillsboro County Sheriff David Gee led theirs – CMPD Chief of Police Rodney Monroe was out on the street directing operations. It is believed that this hands-on approach is also credited with encouraging proper behavior and discipline by officers.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Chief Rodney Monroe out on the street with his officers. Photo by Mickey H. Osterreicher

Brian Cunningham, public information officer (PIO) for CMPD, said that an important step the department took was to place field PIOs in several locations to work with the media.  The PIOs answered journalists’ questions and informed them of where to go.  Cunningham also credits Osterreicher with helping the department develop policies such as the field PIO program.

“Mickey helped with training on working with the media for large scale events,” Cunningham said.  “We were able to train our entire department in media relations, which was critical to our success.”

Highly visible Public Information Officers were on the scene. Photo by Mickey H. Osterreicher

Journalists across the nation feared the worst in the days leading up to the Republican and Democratic National Conventions.  Memories of the mass arrests of protestors and journalists during the 2008 conventions in St. Paul and Denver had not faded, and the arrest of journalists across the nation had steadily increased each year since then.

Although no journalists were arrested during the DNC, on the Saturday before the convention, Washington Post photographer Bonnie Jo Mount said she was approached by Bank of America security guards, who told her that she was not allowed to photograph the outside of their building even though she was on a public sidewalk.

Mount got in touch with Osterreicher, who immediately contacted the head of Bank of America corporate security and the head of security for the building to get clarification on their policies regarding photography.  Osterreicher said that the heads of security acknowledged that Mount had every right to photograph the building from the street, and assured him that the security guards would be made aware of the policies reflecting that right.

“It was very clear from my conversations with Bank of America that they were not happy about some of their overzealous security officers and were more than willing to remedy this problem,” Osterreicher said. “Later in the week I took a picture of the security fence and a guard in front of the building and no one said a word.”

Bank of America corporate security guard outside their headquarters in Charlotte. Photo by Mickey H. Osterreicher

There was also some Twitter traffic regarding two journalists being confronted by police at the direction of “undercover agents” who the journalists had apparently recognized and photographed. According to reports one of the journalists voluntarily deleted his images after both were stopped and searched by uniform police. No official complaints about this incident or any other interference with journalists were received by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP), which ran a hotline for journalists to handle any problems.

“If [the hotline] keeps one person from going to jail and allows them to get back on the street and reporting the news, then it’s worth it,” said Gregg Leslie, Interim Executive Director for RCFP.

Leslie said the hotline’s inception resulted from strife between police and the media back in 1972, when journalists felt that police were targeting them for arrest.  Since then, attorneys have stood at the ready for when a call comes through from a distressed journalist.

“Over the years it’s really been useful,” Leslie said.  “One to two times during a convention, there will be a mass arrest and reporters will get swept into it.” The NPPA and the Reporters Committee have worked together in the past but Osterreicher said the “cooperation between our organizations is a concrete example of what can be accomplished by partnering on these critical issues.”

In order to give journalists the best chance to have their charges dropped and get back to reporting, RCFP employed attorneys in the host cities of the convention.  This year those positions were assumed by Gregg Thomas and Carol LoCicero of the Tampa firm Thomas & LoCicero, and John Buchan of the Charlotte firm McGuire Woods. They attributed the fact that no calls of problems being received to the level of preparation that went into training officers for the convention.

“We informed the police from the outset that we were here and what our plans were [in the event of a journalist's arrest],” Thomas said.

LoCicero said that officers were very receptive to the training that they offered prior to the convention, noting that the Tampa Police Department implemented a policy requiring an officer to get approval from a supervisor before making an arrest of a member of the media.

Buchan especially credits the work done by NPPA and the Reporters Committee in the months prior to the convention for informing officers of press rights and the importance of remaining cognizant of those rights while protecting public safety.  Buchan said the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) did a great job of using the training to see that police and journalists alike would be able to do their jobs during the convention.

“The police in Charlotte really went to school on what happened in St. Paul and Denver and especially at this year’s Chicago NATO Summit,” Buchan said.  “They didn’t want a repeat of the arrests that took place in 2008 and they did a great job implementing policies to ensure that did not happen.”

Everyone had a camera and was taking photographs or recording. Photo by Mickey H. Osterreicher

Osterreicher noted that while he still continues to deal with photographers being interfered with and arrested on an almost daily basis around the country he is very pleased that in those situations where the police have made a concerted effort to avoid such confrontations, they have for the most part not occurred. “The NPPA board of directors made a decision in January of this year to take substantive steps to avoid a repeat of the mass arrests that took place during protests at prior national conventions,” Osterreicher said. “I am very appreciative of the support and direction I received from the board and the opportunity to have helped in some small measure,” he added.

NPPA President Sean Elliot said, “this is a great example of the positive effect of pro-active efforts by NPPA and other groups to reach-out to government agencies;” adding  “journalists, not just NPPA members, owe Mickey and all those involved in these efforts, a debt of gratitude.” “It is my sincere hope that such success can be built upon and spread to more routine interactions between the police and visual journalists,” he concluded.

Mickey H. Osterreicher, general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA), offered his legal expertise in a webinar Thursday night in which panelists discussed media issues surrounding the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Tampa, Fla., and the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Charlotte, N.C.

The webinar, entitled “Reporting at the Conventions : Safety, Security & Rights,” featured journalists and policy experts who offered their advice on how to act and what to look for while covering the events.  Josh Stearns, the Journalism and Public Media Campaign Director at Free Press, led the discussion that focused primarily on arrest issues and Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizures.

“I think one of the things that drew [the panel] together was the concern for finding ways to support journalists as the demographics of journalism are changing, and we’re seeing more and more freelance, independent, and citizen journalists out there on the front lines covering these sorts of events,” Stearns said.  “We want to provide tools, networks, resources and support for those journalists.”

The panel featured Natasha Lennard and Susie Cagle, two journalists who shared their experiences of being arrested while covering Occupy protests.  The panel also featured Andy Sellars, who works for the Digital Media Law Project at Harvard’s Berkman Center.

The webinar gave viewers a chance to interact and direct questions to the panelists about issues particularly concerning to them.  In light of the increase of freelance and citizen journalists, one pressing concern involved distinguishing one’s self from protestors and the extent to which media credentials would protect journalists from police interference.

Osterreicher, who will attend both the RNC and DNC, told viewers that only officially issued credentials will be honored and valid for inside security perimeter areas, and that prohibitions against certain items may make it difficult for anyone without those credentials to carry out their assignments.

“The problem is that for both of these conventions, I think the secret service are pretty much setting the tone for these things,” Osterreicher said.  “”It’ll be interesting to see what happens when people are carrying some of these prohibited items to the credentialed area.”

Sellars informed viewers that his group had published a guide on the state of the law in Tampa and Charlotte that will help journalists better understand what to expect while covering the conventions.

“Both Tampa and Charlotte have passed ordinances that prohibit certain items,” Sellars said.  “The trick is that you have to think about these things from the perspective of law enforcement.  It’s not what your intent is so much as what the police think your intent is.”

The RNC runs from Aug. 27-30, while the DNC runs from Sep. 4-6.  For more information on the issues discussed during the webinar, a recording of the event can be seen here.

Though the attention of the nation today is focused on the Supreme Court’s Health Care ruling, it should not be missed that the justices released an important First Amendment decision, striking down the Stolen Valor Act by a vote of 6-3. The Act made it illegal to lie about receiving a medal or military decoration. The bottom line appears to be that “falsity alone may not suffice to bring the speech outside the First Amendment.”

You can read about the decision here: http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/court-holds-stolen-valor-act-unconstitutional-dismisses-first-american-financial-v-edwards/

Those arguing for the law to be upheld said that false speech had no value and therefore should not be protected by the First Amendment.

The NPPA was part of a coalition of 24 news media organizations that signed on to an amicus brief arguing that the Act would make the government the arbiter of truth and allowing punishment for false speech would eviscerate press freedom.

The brief can be found here: http://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/briefs-comments/united-states-v-alvarez

Supporting the notion that the most appropriate way to fight disagreeable speech is with more speech, and in the marketplace of ideas, the court said:

The Government has not shown, and cannot show, why counterspeech would not suffice to achieve its interest. The facts of this case indicate that the dynamics of free speech, of counterspeech, of refutation, can overcome the lie. Respondent lied at a public meeting. Even before the FBI began investigating him for his false statements “Alvarez was perceived as a phony.”  Once the lie was made public, he wasridiculed online, his actions were reported in the press, and a fellow board member called for his resignation. There is good reason to believe that a similar fate would befallother false claimants.

The entire decision can be read at this link: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-210d4e9.pdf

The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) sent a letter to Sheriff Haley of the Washoe County (Nev.) Sheriff’s Office today requesting that the department conduct an investigation regarding an incident in which sheriff’s deputies injured and detained a photographer covering a brush fire earlier this week.

Sixty-year-old photojournalist Tim Dunn suffered scrapes to his hands and face on Monday while attempting to photograph a fire in Sun Valley, Nevada, after he was thrown to the ground and handcuffed by sheriff’s deputies and cited for obstruction and resisting.

“This is just the most recent incident in a rash of similar police abuses across the country,” said Mickey H. Osterreicher, general counsel for NPPA.  “While in some situations the press may have no greater rights than those of the general public, they certainly have no less right of access on a public street.”

Dunn, who has worked for the Reno Gazette-Journal for the past 21 years, was not arrested following the incident despite being physically manhandled by the deputies.  Sheriff’s Deputy Armando Avina confirmed that the incident occurred but would not comment on it because reports of the case had not been completed.

NPPA’s letter to the sheriff also requested that the charges against Dunn be immediately dropped, and that the department issue orders directing deputies to cease such activity against photographers.

“While not an expert on Nevada law, it has been my experience that a person must be physically obstructing an officer and that mere presence does not satisfy the elements of that crime,” Osterreicher said.  “Using the catch-all charge of resisting against a 60-year-old, well respected photojournalist is reprehensible.”

Dunn was covering a brush fire that destroyed two homes when he said he was told to leave the area and directed to a location farther away.  Dunn said he complained that the location was too far away to take photographs, and that he and Capt. John Spencer got into a heated conversation.  It was then that Dunn said one deputy shoved his foot into the award-winning photographer’s back to get him on the ground and another deputy pushed his face into the gravel.

“It appears that all of your personnel acted in an arbitrary, capricious and unprofessional manner and appear to have no concept of the First Amendment rights granted to the press under the United States Constitution and Nevada Statutes,” said Osterreicher in his letter to the sheriff.  “NPPA stands ready to work with your department to help develop reasonable and workable policies and practices in order to avoid similar situations.”

Beryl Love, Gazette-Journal executive editor, said there have been multiple instances in the past year when staffers were denied access to scenes where they had a right to be.  Love said the newspaper is preparing a formal complaint to local law enforcement and advising Dunn on possible civil actions.

Dunn said the deputies accused him of impersonating a firefighter by wearing yellow protective fire gear and a helmet and goggles.  Sierra Front Media Fire Guide, published by a coalition of state and federal agencies, recommends wearing these items while covering fires.

Dunn said that he was detained for more than half an hour after being handcuffed.  He said he is disappointed by Monday’s incident and confused as to why the deputies responded in the way they did.

An Aug. 1 court date is scheduled for Dunn’s charges of obstruction and resisting.

Representatives of the National Press Photographers Association met a couple of weeks ago with attorneys from the United States Copyright Office to discuss copyright small claims solutions and other copyright issues important to photojournalists.

NPPA General Counsel Mickey Osterreicher, NPPA Executive Director Mindy Hutchison, and NPPA Attorney and Advocacy Chair Alicia Calzada took a break from the weekend’s Northern Short Course in Fairfax, Virginia to met with the General Counsel of the Copyright Office and two policy attorneys from the office in Washington, D.C.

Calzada and Osterreicher at the Copyright Office in DC. Photo by Mindy Hutchison.

NPPA submitted official comments to the Copyright Office back in January, outlining the challenges that photojournalists have relating to copyright claims, particularly smaller claims, and sharing the organization’s view of what we would like to see in a solution for small copyright claims. Friday’s meeting allowed NPPA to expand on the topics raised in the comments and answer questions from the Copyright Office.  Any small copyright claims solution would likely require passage from Congress.

Click here to read a copy of NPPA’s official comments to the Copyright Office.

The first two in a series of so-called “Ag-Gag” bills has been enacted into law. The bills, different versions of which have been pending in over half a dozen states, target animal rights activists but frequently are written in broad language that impacts other lawful First Amendment activity.

Iowa was the first state to pass a bill, in early March, making access to an agricultural facility by “false pretenses” illegal. It was heavily amended from its original version. The introduced version of the bill would have made recording while on the farm without the consent of the owner a misdemeanor (and a felony for a second offense) and made mere possession of photographs or video resulting from the earlier act a crime. Thankfully, that version did not pass- it would have been easily found unconstitutional. To put this into perspective, the only other category of photography that is a crime to possess is child pornography. In fact, just a couple of years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to criminalize the possession of video depicting animal cruelty.

A bill making photography of farm operations without the consent of the owner illegal has passed in Utah. The Utah state senate passed HB 187 and it is headed to the governor for a signature. An amendment was made after the NPPA and several other groups protested the original language of the bill. The bill makes it a crime to photograph “agricultural operations” without consent of the owner.  There was no distinction in the original version of the bill for private vs. pubic property, and the wording left open the possibility prosecution for photographing animals grazing on public lands. The bill was amended to clarify that “agricultural operations” is “private property” and passed with that language. However the bill is still problematic as it takes a crime- trespassing- and makes it subject to a greater punishment (a Class A misdemeanor vs. a Class B misdemeanor) because the added element of a First Amendment activity is involved.

A bill pending in New York, would criminalize the “unauthorized video, audio recording or photography done without the farm owner’s written consent.” Like certain proposals NPPA objected to in the last, there is not even a limitation in this bill that the photographer be trespassing. As written, it would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in prison, or a fine of $1,000 to stand on the side of the road and photograph farm animals or farm.

Even bills which makes it a crime to take photographs on a farm while trespassing are problematic because an essential element of the crime is photography. It is a content-based restriction (with a specific list of what would be in the photograph that would convert an otherwise law abiding photographer into a criminal).

The application of these laws to photographic activity will be subject to constitutional scrutiny. NPPA will continue to monitor and oppose these bills as we have done in the past.

NPPA is drafting a model release for photographers in Utah and Iowa to bring to assignments on property that could be considered an agricultural operation, or otherwise subject to this law.

If you are aware of pending legislation that would affect photographers, please alert us at advo...@nppa.org or law...@nppa.org.

On Tuesday the NPPA submitted official comments to the U.S. Copyright Office in response to the office’s request for comments on the idea of creating a system to adjudicate copyright infringements when the damages are low, also called Remedies for Small Copyright Claims.

The brief, written by NPPA attorneys Mickey Osterreicher and Alicia Wagner Calzada, with a significant contribution from board member Greg Smith, outlines the challenges specific to photojournalists, notes characteristics that would be important in the solution and presents ideas for framing a system.

A claim for copyright infringement can only be brought in federal court, but lawsuits in federal court cost tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, making it rare that a photojournalist will find the claim worth bringing. In addition, the rapid turnaround of news photography makes it virtually impossible for photojournalists to register their work prior to publication, which results in increased risk in bringing a case. Although a successful copyright plaintiff can sometimes get an award of legal fees, there is no guarantee that the defendant will be able to pay those fee. As the comment notes, “For those infringements that are discovered, most will never be prosecuted because it is economically unfeasible for the creators to commence an action in federal court.”

A small claims solution for infringements that are not worth hundreds of thousands of dollars would increase the ability of photojournalists to police their work and get compensated fairly for violations of their copyright.

NPPA is looking forward to working on this potential solution with the copyright office and with other photo organizations.

Read the official final_Copyright Small Claims Comments 01-17-12-1