Re: QR and photographers

["Roy Wilke" <3891@bit.net.au>]

WhaleOilBeefHooked <daproc@spambait.umpires.com> wrote in message
news:6u6m3.4$Ym2.259067@news0.optus.net.au...
> MattyQ wrote in message <3798a180.0@news.bris.corplink.com.au>...
>
(snip of debate over whether QR can or cannot prevent photographers from
going onto the platform)


> I fail to see the analogy. QR, as a government body, cannot go making
rules
> as and when it sees fit. It can only do so by legislation, by regulation
> approved by the Minister and Parliament, or when it is allowed by
> regulation. This is a matter of law, and applies to all publically owned
> bodies. All I am asking is for somebody to supply the legal basis for the
> requirement that a non-commercial photographer to obtain permission before
> hand. If there is no legal basis for this requirement, then it is
> unenforceable.
>
> DaveP


I think you will find that QR do have the right - and can enforce it
legally. ISTR that a railway station platform is not  universally accessible
to the public, and the SM can prevent access to whoever he wishes to prevent
access to.

Getting back to Roma Street, the original poster could stand on Countess
Street or in Albert Park and  take photos without having to ask for
permission.

However, it would probably be best to contact the SM at Roma Street - he
might be lucky enough to get the staff on a good day and so gain access to
places even better for photography than the passenger platforms.