Selling a Photo Taken in a Paparazzi Free Zone

Davis Ingwers, a student in Jon Pfeiffer's Spring 2013 Media Law class at Pepperdine University, wrote the following essay in response to the question: "You take a photo of a famous actor in the "paparazzi free" zone at the Malibu Lumberyard. Can you sell the photo? Would your answer be different if you are a paparazzo?"

I should not be allowed to sell the photograph regardless if I am a paparazzo or not. Frist, since the Malibu Lumber Yard has clear signage that indicates "no paparazzi" are allowed - you must assume their efforts are in an attempt to create a specific type of environment for the target market or consumer. By taking a picture of a famous actor and then selling it, that individual would be assuming the role of a paparazzi in doing so - which clearly is prohibited at the Lumber Yard. By disregarding that rule, I would be in direct conflict with the owners of the Lumber Yard for breaking a rule they had expressed very explicitly. In taking and selling that photo, I would be wronging the owners of that facility.

In addition, I would be doing wrong by the actor whom I took a picture of and then sold. Since the Malibu Lumbar Yard has been publicly designated as a "paparazzi free" zone, an actor can come there and expect not to be harassed or followed by photographers who do so everywhere else. If I'm not a paparazzo, but I then take up the role of one - I am still violating that rule and in turn imposing on both the owners of the Lumber Yard and the actor whose picture was taken.

Personally I think its almost more incorrect if I sell the picture and am not a paparazzo - it just seems more selfish to me. At least the paparazzo would have been doing his job.