What we’re seeing in the amended regulations is some extremely confusing and problematic legalese. We agree with basing need for a permit on whether a filmmaker/photographer actually causes an obstruction, but the Mayor’s Office of Film, Theatre, and Broadcasting’s definition of ‘obstruction’ is so difficult to grasp that it will cause problems on the street.

Here is the some of the language we object to:

(3) For purposes of this subdivision (b), “obstruction” shall mean the assertion of exclusive control with respect to the use or occupancy of such space, and “unobstructed sidewalk use” shall mean, with respect to filming or photography occurring on a sidewalk or other public pedestrian passageway, the use of such space that is not an “obstruction.”

We prefer the explanatory Q&A that MOFTB provides on their website, but clarifications on websites have no legal standing and so don’t help in the long run. Therefore, we ask that the following text by MOFTB be moved into the regulations themselves:

“‘Obstruction’ means that people are actually prevented from reasonably using the sidewalk – that is, the person filming has asserted exclusive control with respect to the use of such space.”

It is also absolutely crucial that there be a simple affirmative sentence stating that a filmmaker/photographer’s mere presence is not in itself an obstruction.

In an extraordinary outpouring, over 35,000 people signed the petition protesting the earlier regulations. Now we need to insure that the will of the people isn’t lost in legal soup which will cause further problems, not only for filmmaker/photographers, but for police and the MOFTB. The public comments period ends Dec. 13, 2007. Please register your concerns with MOFTB and attend the public hearing on Dec. 13th!