Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Last week I made the monumental mistake of taking photographs of
Cockfosters Station, on my way home from work. I always take pictures of tube stations - the Piccadilly Line ones are just beautiful. Especially Southgate, but I digress. One of the station staff approached me and asked what I was doing and I told him. (I have spoken to him before about taking pictures and it was never a problem...) First things first - I should have asked permission as a courtesy. I totally accept that. In my defence it was spare of the moment with the light and shadows and I was in the last carriage, so didn't think about walking the length of the platform and back again. But yes, I should have asked permission. I thought that was the end of it. I apologised and explained that I thought it was fine because I recall seeing a sign (somewhere) asking people not to take flash photography, so I kind of thought that was a presumed permission. He then said that I was causing alarm amongst passengers and drivers - which was totally not the case. There were no passengers or drivers about at that time. And I actually don't want people in photographs of buildings. One of the cleaners exclaimed something in French to me but I didn't understand. But accept that she could have been alarmed. But then she alarmed me by not speaking in English but that's beside the point. He then got his supervisor who asked the same question, and said he understood that I wanted to take pictures of the architecture but I wasn't too photograph anything in the roof, due to "heightened security". Yet Cockfosters is without staff for several hours in the morning and evening - if security was so heightened should this not be addressed? Or was that a fib? SO I then decided to check the TfL website, where I discovered some fairly stringent rules about taking pictures, he http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...aspx#section-2 TfL's website offers a "student/non professional users" £40 license fee, that takes about three weeks to be processed and "this permit is only a permit to film or photograph. It does not allow you to publish or broadcast your photographs or films anywhere externally, including on the internet..." Then I found this: https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...ewTabtext=Tube Taking photographs on the Tube If you are just passing through, you shouldn't have a problem taking personal snaps, souvenir shots etc. although you must NOT use flash or lights on any of our platforms. However, if you want to spend more than 10-15 minutes at any one station videoing or taking photos, or if they are for professional use, you MUST have a permit. So, I was correct in the presumed permission - the pictures were not for professional use, and I was at the station for about 5 minutes. I suppose my point is that if you want to take pictures, take a print out of that webpage from TfL with you! And that if people mention security as a reason for anything, I instantly lose interest in what they are saying. It seems such an easy one-excuse-fits-all kind of answer. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Railist wrote:
Last week I made the monumental mistake of taking photographs of Cockfosters Station, on my way home from work. I always take pictures of tube stations - the Piccadilly Line ones are just beautiful. Especially Southgate, but I digress. One of the station staff approached me and asked what I was doing and I told him. (I have spoken to him before about taking pictures and it was never a problem...) First things first - I should have asked permission as a courtesy. I totally accept that. In my defence it was spare of the moment with the light and shadows and I was in the last carriage, so didn't think about walking the length of the platform and back again. But yes, I should have asked permission. I thought that was the end of it. I apologised and explained that I thought it was fine because I recall seeing a sign (somewhere) asking people not to take flash photography, so I kind of thought that was a presumed permission. He then said that I was causing alarm amongst passengers and drivers - which was totally not the case. There were no passengers or drivers about at that time. And I actually don't want people in photographs of buildings. One of the cleaners exclaimed something in French to me but I didn't understand. But accept that she could have been alarmed. But then she alarmed me by not speaking in English but that's beside the point. He then got his supervisor who asked the same question, and said he understood that I wanted to take pictures of the architecture but I wasn't too photograph anything in the roof, due to "heightened security". Yet Cockfosters is without staff for several hours in the morning and evening - if security was so heightened should this not be addressed? Or was that a fib? SO I then decided to check the TfL website, where I discovered some fairly stringent rules about taking pictures, he http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...aspx#section-2 TfL's website offers a "student/non professional users" £40 license fee, that takes about three weeks to be processed and "this permit is only a permit to film or photograph. It does not allow you to publish or broadcast your photographs or films anywhere externally, including on the internet..." Then I found this: https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...ewTabtext=Tube Taking photographs on the Tube If you are just passing through, you shouldn't have a problem taking personal snaps, souvenir shots etc. although you must NOT use flash or lights on any of our platforms. However, if you want to spend more than 10-15 minutes at any one station videoing or taking photos, or if they are for professional use, you MUST have a permit. So, I was correct in the presumed permission - the pictures were not for professional use, and I was at the station for about 5 minutes. I suppose my point is that if you want to take pictures, take a print out of that webpage from TfL with you! And that if people mention security as a reason for anything, I instantly lose interest in what they are saying. It seems such an easy one-excuse-fits-all kind of answer. I think you were basically correct to do what you did, and I see no reason why you should have felt obliged to ask permission for five minutes of picture-taking. The LU guidelines are quite clear and reasonable and they should not need to be modified to suit the security paranoia of a particular member or members of LU staff. However, all TfL staff are required to be very aware of potential risks and one thing they are probably trained to look out for is people who behave in a manner that makes them stand out. So their response is perhaps understandable in that context. There is one grey area in the guidelines and that is the meaning of "for personal use". A court would have to decide precisely what that term meant, but it would normally exclude publication (except for editorial use). Once again, the term "publication" is not precisely defined anywhere, and would need to be decided on in court, but the term would normally include display on a web site or internet file-sharing. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 00:00:30 on
Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Bruce remarked: TfL staff are required to be very aware of potential risks and one thing they are probably trained to look out for is people who behave in a manner that makes them stand out. And, obviously, terrorists doing reconnaissance will be trying hard to stand out from the crowd. -- Roland Perry |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote: And, obviously, terrorists doing reconnaissance will be trying hard to stand out from the crowd. And the last thing you want to do in order to improve security is to encourage knowledgable and interested members of the public to keep their eyes open... -- Mike Bristow |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Railist wrote: Then I found this: https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...ewTabtext=Tube Taking photographs on the Tube If you are just passing through, you shouldn't have a problem taking personal snaps, souvenir shots etc. although you must NOT use flash or lights on any of our platforms. However, if you want to spend more than 10-15 minutes at any one station videoing or taking photos, or if they are for professional use, you MUST have a permit. TfL seems to have taken that page down since you posted the link to it, although it is still available in Google's cache for now: http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...ache:-vfRGwN0- MEJ:https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...Information.do %3Bjsessionid%3D %28J2EE704339600%29ID0483828352DB00743095560877256 388End%3Bsaplb_*%3D %28J2EE704339600%29704339652%3FentityNum %3D00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003 939%26kbname%3DSDB %26newTabtext%3DTube+site:custserv.tfl.gov.uk+%22T aking+photographs+on +the+Tube%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&source=www.g oogle.co.uk or http://tinyurl.com/Tube-Photo-Rule-Cache The fact that TfL is secretly trying to hide or remove its more helpful rules like this is proof that it, like all public transport organisations, is full of evil, sadistic *******s who like nothing more than any flimsy excuse to make their unlucky customers suffer as much as possible. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote: Railist wrote: Then I found this: https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...ewTabtext=Tube Taking photographs on the Tube If you are just passing through, you shouldn't have a problem taking personal snaps, souvenir shots etc. although you must NOT use flash or lights on any of our platforms. However, if you want to spend more than 10-15 minutes at any one station videoing or taking photos, or if they are for professional use, you MUST have a permit. TfL seems to have taken that page down since you posted the link to it, although it is still available in Google's cache for now: [snip massive URL] or http://tinyurl.com/Tube-Photo-Rule-Cache The fact that TfL is secretly trying to hide or remove its more helpful rules like this is proof that it, like all public transport organisations, is full of evil, sadistic *******s who like nothing more than any flimsy excuse to make their unlucky customers suffer as much as possible. No Pippa, it's because the 'custserv' system which is used for the FAQ section on the TfL website uses dynamic URLs or somesuch which can't be used to directly hyperlink to particular FAQs - less than ideal, I fully grant you, however the TfL webmaster is not sitting and monitoring discussion on usenet or traffic flow to particular webpages and then taking them down when they get mentioned or get too popular. Sorry, I realise that doesn't follow the script of abject paranoia. Let me try again... Yes Pippa, it's hard to believe it but it seems you've finally found proof that operatives sit in the TfL Lair Of Doom buried deep under London looking for ways to purposefully frustrate everyone - they monitor all communications, and are perpetually tinkering with things so as to cause frustration so as to please their twisted psyches. Even when you do encounter supposed helpfulness, if you look deep into their eyes you'll see the tell tale giveaway signs that they aren't like you or I, but are in fact lizards, who exist here on earth to fulfill some devilish masterplan so obscure and unfathomable that we can merely wonder and shudder at their fundamental evil. On a lighter note, have you met Boltar? I reckon you two would get on famously. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Mizter T wrote: wrote: Railist wrote: Then I found this: https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...ewTabtext=Tube TfL seems to have taken that page down since you posted the link to it, although it is still available in Google's cache for now: [snip massive URL] or http://tinyurl.com/Tube-Photo-Rule-Cache The fact that TfL is secretly trying to hide or remove its more helpful rules like this is proof that it, like all public transport organisations, is full of evil, sadistic *******s who like nothing more than any flimsy excuse to make their unlucky customers suffer as much as possible. No Pippa, it's because the 'custserv' system which is used for the FAQ section on the TfL website uses dynamic URLs or somesuch which can't be used to directly hyperlink to particular FAQs Interesting. Thanks for that. Of course, the real question is why TfL goes out of its way to use a system that automatically hides/changes URLs all the time? What is it trying to hide? - less than ideal, I fully grant you, however the TfL webmaster is not sitting and monitoring discussion on usenet or traffic flow to particular webpages and then taking them down when they get mentioned or get too popular. Well, of course, if the system has been set up to hide webpages from people automatically, then obviously the webmaster doesn't need to do it himself. Sorry, I realise that doesn't follow the script of abject paranoia. Let me try again... Yes Pippa, it's hard to believe it but it seems you've finally found proof that operatives sit in the TfL Lair Of Doom buried deep under London looking for ways to purposefully frustrate everyone - they monitor all communications, and are perpetually tinkering with things so as to cause frustration so as to please their twisted psyches. Even when you do encounter supposed helpfulness, if you look deep into their eyes you'll see the tell tale giveaway signs that they aren't like you or I, but are in fact lizards, who exist here on earth to fulfill some devilish masterplan so obscure and unfathomable that we can merely wonder and shudder at their fundamental evil. Sorry to disappoint you. I'm not that kind of a conspiracy theorist, and there's no masterplan beyond simple human nature. After all, Public Transport will always be something that no-one wants to use, unless they reluctantly have to as a last resort. It's only natural that people working in/for it end up sadistically taking advantage of this, enjoying schadenfreude over our misery, and finding ways to increase it. We'd all do the same if we were in their shoes. On a lighter note, have you met Boltar? I reckon you two would get on famously. No. Although he talks a lot of good sense about transport, on just about everything else he's a useless piece of evil right-wing ****. I mean, he actually thinks the recent rioters were bad guys, instead of the plucky little heroes standing up against the bourgeois control- freaks running the powers that be. How wrong could he get? |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote: Mizter T wrote: wrote: Railist wrote: Then I found this: https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_csi...ewTabtext=Tube TfL seems to have taken that page down since you posted the link to it, although it is still available in Google's cache for now: [snip massive URL] or http://tinyurl.com/Tube-Photo-Rule-Cache The fact that TfL is secretly trying to hide or remove its more helpful rules like this is proof that it, like all public transport organisations, is full of evil, sadistic *******s who like nothing more than any flimsy excuse to make their unlucky customers suffer as much as possible. No Pippa, it's because the 'custserv' system which is used for the FAQ section on the TfL website uses dynamic URLs or somesuch which can't be used to directly hyperlink to particular FAQs Interesting. Thanks for that. Of course, the real question is why TfL goes out of its way to use a system that automatically hides/changes URLs all the time? What is it trying to hide? It's quite annoying, I fully agree - for their FAQs (IIRC there were separate LU and Oyster FAQs), TfL used to use the widely implemented 'custhelp' system (from a company called RightNow) which did produce static URLs which could be quited elsewhere - I dunno if the newer 'custserv' system is from the same company, but it seems to be a rather more comprehensive combined FAQ and contact tool/interface - it handles a whole range of contact possibilities for TfL as a whole (complaints / suggestions / report lost property / street faults etc) as well as the FAQs ("Search Common Questions") - you can see that this all sits together in the same interface he http://www.tfl.gov.uk/contact (The above is a pseudo-address which actually takes you straight into the 'custserv' pages.) I've probably used all the wrong terminology above - the 'custserv' and 'custhelp' descriptions I used feature in the respective URLs - for example, here's a couple of example of the 'custhelp' system in current use... ....by TheTrainline... http://thetrainline.custhelp.com/ ....and BT... http://bt.custhelp.com/ - less than ideal, I fully grant you, however the TfL webmaster is not sitting and monitoring discussion on usenet or traffic flow to particular webpages and then taking them down when they get mentioned or get too popular. Well, of course, if the system has been set up to hide webpages from people automatically, then obviously the webmaster doesn't need to do it himself. See above - it's an annoying feature of this particular system, and I think it's a pretty safe bet it's an off-the-shelf system rather than being one designed specifically by/for TfL. Sorry, I realise that doesn't follow the script of abject paranoia. Let me try again... Yes Pippa, it's hard to believe it but it seems you've finally found proof that operatives sit in the TfL Lair Of Doom buried deep under London looking for ways to purposefully frustrate everyone - they monitor all communications, and are perpetually tinkering with things so as to cause frustration so as to please their twisted psyches. Even when you do encounter supposed helpfulness, if you look deep into their eyes you'll see the tell tale giveaway signs that they aren't like you or I, but are in fact lizards, who exist here on earth to fulfill some devilish masterplan so obscure and unfathomable that we can merely wonder and shudder at their fundamental evil. Sorry to disappoint you. I'm not that kind of a conspiracy theorist, and there's no masterplan beyond simple human nature. After all, Public Transport will always be something that no-one wants to use, unless they reluctantly have to as a last resort. It's only natural that people working in/for it end up sadistically taking advantage of this, enjoying schadenfreude over our misery, and finding ways to increase it. We'd all do the same if we were in their shoes. I know many many people who want to use public transport (no, not just me) - you shouldn't project your own thoughts onto the populace at large. Even if one goes along with the premise of your first sentence, I'm left wondering at your world view, what with all this 'natural' sadism and enjoyment of misery that again you seem to think are traits which are or would be shared by everyone else. On a lighter note, have you met Boltar? I reckon you two would get on famously. No. Although he talks a lot of good sense about transport, on just about everything else he's a useless piece of evil right-wing ****. I mean, he actually thinks the recent rioters were bad guys, instead of the plucky little heroes standing up against the bourgeois control- freaks running the powers that be. How wrong could he get? If he turns up then you can both enjoy a nice troll fight together. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:32:57 +0100
"Mizter T" wrote: If he turns up then you can both enjoy a nice troll fight together. Who would look after my bridge while I was gone?? B2003 |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 07:53:19 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote: On a lighter note, have you met Boltar? I reckon you two would get on famously. No. Although he talks a lot of good sense about transport, on just about everything else he's a useless piece of evil right-wing ****. I Its nice to be loved. mean, he actually thinks the recent rioters were bad guys, instead of the plucky little heroes standing up against the bourgeois control- freaks running the powers that be. How wrong could he get? Well quite. I probably just need to drink more Guardian Cola and then I'll get better. ![]() B2003 |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Security alert at Bushey station needed 20 squad cars ? | London Transport | |||
New National Security Technology ignored that might have stopped the bombing | London Transport | |||
removing staff? What happens to security? | London Transport | |||
How do you enter your security answer on the Oyster Sales site? | London Transport | |||
Security of Oyster Cards | London Transport |