Its illegal to film in national parks?

It seems similar to the Bundy's wanting to graze cattle on public land, individuals looking to profit off of a public good. Don't think film crews should be allowed in, sans some special permits. However, a single person shooting a youtube video seems like a different thing, they are still monetizing a public good, but I see no harm or issue that would differentiate it from someone taking family photos. The public good isn't being consumed or damaged and others aren't being harmed any more than what occurs under permissible behavior.

People need to fuck off with flying drones around though, I'm trying to walk my dog and they are flying way too damn close to people and piloted by people who are far enough away I can't be like "hey you over there, wtf! Cut it out, stop taking sexy pictures of me."

HGCC said:

People need to fuck off with flying drones around though, I'm trying to walk my dog and they are flying way too damn close to people and piloted by people who are far enough away I can't be like "hey you over there, wtf! Cut it out, stop taking sexy pictures of me."

Click to expand...

There are heavy drone regs and apps soon that you point at the drone and get all the info to forward to the FAA. A drone over 250 grams must be registered and the pilot licensed as a hobbyist at least and commercially if making money in America. You cannot fly over people, closer than 150 feet from them or an occupied building (bando is ok). This goes for racing drones, video drones and RC model aircraft. All drones must be in visual sight (with out aids) of the operator and if flying FPV a spotter standing next to you is required and the drone or plane has to be in their sight at all times. Drones under 250 grams don't need a license, but the rules still apply. You hold all the cards and the drone pilot holds practically none if they are breaking the rules, the fines can be life changing. There are many other regulations about drones and any one can lose a pilot their license and even livelihood.

The war in Ukraine demonstrated what many knew all along, these can be used as weapons of war, murder and assassination. A RC hobbyist can basically make a GPS guided cruise missile or drone that can carry pounds of explosive and hit a target within a couple of feet from many miles away autonomously, all using off the shelf shit like flight control computers with GPS and RC model plane parts available cheap as dirt online.

Here is a small example of what is available online and they can be programmed to steer a drone onto a stationary target and are often 2 to 4 feet in accuracy, and many use GPS, GLONASS and the European constellation for extra satellites and accuracy.

Ah, so if "commercial" includes immediate or eventual posting on a monetized site, what happens?

My point applies directly to the reasoning stated in the successfully appeal.

Rob Roy said:

A reasonable case could be made if there is a prohibition or license required, Feds are violating at least 3 articles from the Bill of Rights.
First, ninth and tenth amendments.

Also, to be required to ask permission from government to exercise a right is Orwellian. If it's a right, you don't have to ask, if it's a privilege you need permission.

I'm too lazy to go searching, but I'm pretty sure there is case law which says rights are not subject to licensure. Not that logic wouldn't already tell us that. The fact that the Feds have gotten away with reducing some rights to privileges, (think prohibition of substances, gun licensure etc.) isn't reason for them to continue to do so. In fact it's reason for people to film in Parks en masse, while open carrying and tell the little Park Ranger guys to go rescue a squirrel up a tree or something.

Thank you for bringing this up @canndo. Next time I'm anywhere near a "federal park" I will be sure and film and tell any Park Rangers I would love it if they issue me a citation.

Click to expand...

I figured you would enjoy this.

"
is not itself a communicative activity; it is merely a step in the creation of speech that will be communicated at some other time, usually in some other location.” Rather, the court determined that filmmaking was “non-communicative first amendment activity” [sic]."


Bingo! Now how is this materially different than creating (short of publishing) a web site? Or is it?

When does public speech become speech?

canndo said:

Ah, so if "commercial" includes immediate or eventual posting on a monetized site, what happens?

My point applies directly to the reasoning stated in the successfully appeal.

Click to expand...

I went through the thread twice looking for a link to or an excerpt from an appeal. No dice.

xtsho said:

Nothing in the ruling prevents people from recording video. The ruling pertains to commercial entities. And it doesn't prevent them from filming it just requires that they obtain a permit.

Big nothing that has absolutely no effect on the millions of people that visit national Parks and Lands.


Aug. 23, 2022 - In a disappointing turn, a decision that enjoined commercial film permit requirements on federal lands was reversed today and if it stands, commercial videographers and filmmakers may once again need to obtain permits for filming in national parks, forest land and other federal lands.

The case was brought by filmmaker Gordon Price, who was fined for failing to obtain a film permit by the National Park Service (NPS) when he released the film Crawford Road. Certain scenes were filmed in Yorktown Battlefield in the Colonial National Historical Park, which is NPS land and because of that, a permit was required under 54 U.S.C. § 100905. NPS ultimately dropped its case against Price, but Price sued to overturn the statute for violating his First Amendment rights. A district court agreed and found that the statute was an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment, overturned the law and enjoined enforcement of the law and the regulations that implemented it.

In today’s opinion in Price v. Garland, written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg, the 2 to 1 panel reversed the district court. The panel held that although some portions of the national park system are public forums, a public forum analysis does not apply to filmmaking. Judge Ginsburg wrote that because “a filmmaker does not seek to communicate with others at the location in which he or she films, the filmmaker does not use the location as a ‘forum’.” Having made this determination, the appellate court declined to apply a public forum analysis, and further held that filmmaking “is not itself a communicative activity; it is merely a step in the creation of speech that will be communicated at some other time, usually in some other location.” Rather, the court determined that filmmaking was “non-communicative first amendment activity” [sic].

Crawford Road (2018) | Thriller

Crawford Road: Directed by James Person, Gordon Price. With Gordon Price, Ricky D'Alonzo, Alex Michalos, Herb Banks. Crawford Road tells the story of areas of Yorktown Virginia, Crawford Road and The Colonial Parkway. The movie explores the decades of murders that have occurred dating back to...

www.imdb.com

Price v. Barr reversed — National Park permit scheme for commercial filming is reinstated

nppa.org

Click to expand...

Price v garland upheld

Judge Tatel explained that the public forum analysis should depend on the forum, not on the type of expressive activity that takes place within the forum. He added, “By stripping filming of the protections afforded to expression in public forums, the court puts us in direct conflict with other circuits and leaves important expressive activities unprotected in places where the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech should be at its apex.”

Irizarry v. Yehia, “videorecording is ‘unambiguously’ speech-creation, not mere conduct. If the creation of speech did not warrant protection under the First Amendment, the government could bypass the Constitution by simply proceeding upstream and damming the source of speech.”

canndo said:

Price v garland upheld

Click to expand...

And nothing in Price V Garland prevents individuals from filming in a National Park.

One can't help but wonder how those who see every tiny fleck of government interference in the 2nd amendment exercise as a final existential threat to our right to keep and bear are not noisily pointing at a the falling sky of our right to speak. And of course there is the pending 303 case.

xtsho said:

And nothing in Price V Garland prevents individuals from filming in a National Park.

Click to expand...

The ruling could easily be applied to "individuals" per npa "standards.

canndo said:

The ruling could easily be applied to "individuals" per npa "standards.

Click to expand...

Oh good grief. The "It Could" fallback argument.

The fact is that you made a big deal out of a big nothing and apparently didn't even bother to read the Court decisions you referenced.

xtsho said:

Oh good grief. The "It Could" fallback argument.

The fact is that you made a big deal out of a big nothing and apparently didn't even bother to read the Court decisions you referenced.

Click to expand...

I read both decisions. I'm not screaming with my hair on fire, I am pointing out the issues with such a ruling especially given our recent scotus hearing on free speech.

The short of this is the question...when does free speech begin?

And how does anyone know or demonstrate the intent of filming on national park land?

canndo said:

I read both decisions. I'm not screaming with my hair on fire, I am pointing out the issues with such a ruling especially given our recent scotus hearing on free speech.

The short of this is the question...when does free speech begin?

And how does anyone know or demonstrate the intent of filming on national park land?

Click to expand...

When you have a film crew, actors, makeup artists, etc... you're obviously not just filming the family vacation.

Unconstitutional Park Service Filming Rule Upheld by Appeals Court

101,030 views Dec 10, 2022
Which requires you to apply for and obtain a permit for "commercial" filming.

canndo said:

How do you know? Because you weren't stopped the last time you did so? Because it just seems like an insidious make believe indictment of our regulatory state? The burgeoning police state we are all so fearful of? Jack booted thugs and all? Or have you actual, recent, legal knowlege?

From nps.gov

"Commercial filming" means the film, electronic, magnetic, digital, or other recording of a moving image by a person, business, or other entity for a market audience with the intent of generating income. Examples include, but are not limited to, feature film, videography, and documentaries. Commercial filming may include the advertisement of a product or service, or the use of actors, models, sets, or props".

"
Federal law requires a permit for all commercial filming, no matter the size of the crew or the type of equipment. This includes individuals or small groups that don’t use much equipment, but generate revenue by posting footage on websites, such as YouTube and TikTok. The primary focus of the NPS, however, is on commercial filming that has the potential to impact park resources and visitors beyond what occurs from normal visitor use of park areas. .





All filmers, no matter the size, must comply with all rules that apply in park areas, just like other visitors. "

Click to expand...

i live on the edge of the great smoky mtn national park. they have regulations, but not about private individuals running around with a video camera or a phone recording anything. the regulations apply to professionals, who must have permits allowing them to operate in the park.
private citizens can do whatever they want, within the other rules of the park.

I have to obtain a permit to have a yard sale. The tyranny!

MtRainDog said:

I have to obtain a permit to have a yard sale. The tyranny!

Click to expand...

from whom?

cannabineer said:

from whom?

Click to expand...

You can get one from your local police department

Same goes for open bonfires. You'd get a permit from your local Fire Dept. There's lots of things like this. Usually, it's just so you can agree to some basic safety guidelines, and they're making sure you're not a complete moron.