Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

http://petapixel.com/2017/06/09/laguna-beach-requires-100-permit-kind-photo-shoot-public/

The crooks in LB may have been inspired by the scum bureaaucrats in LA CANADA/FLINTRIDGE...

Ronald540 Loc: Sandy Utah

I once had the same problem with a BLM ranger in the west desert. I had stopped to photograph an approaching storm.
He said he could confiscate my camera for not having a permit.
He was dumb enough to give me his card, so I could send him a 14x20 print.
He is still waiting.
Cheers
Ron

ELNikkor

Don't know if ot's still there, but there was a tree in Monterey that was copyrighted. No one was allowed to take a picture of it!

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Did you read the very very end of the article - it appears they may not be requiring permits for amateurs.

Bob Werre

I attended Brooks Institute in Santa Barbara (69-71), where most everything was free to use, but if you started to freelance and collect $ you had to obtain a Pro License. After all when you have 500 photographers in a smallish town they simply overran the established pros and we all worked for dirt fees! We had a number of assignments that used local landmarks that were required assignments--and the typical gear was a large tripod and a 4X5 view camera. The city fathers generally generally liked the idea that our wives provided cheap labor, we rented apartments and provided all the things local businesses wanted to sell us. A good friend and I worked for a law firm re-staging car accidents--I think I got $25 per session where I mostly just parked a car at an intersection and sat there.
Later on I had heard that the city fathers also put in a public land fee for shooting assignments, but I don't know how they determined amateur, pro and student levels.
When I first moved there, the effects of the large Union 76 oil spill were very evident, so I can't image photographers putting that much stress on the culture and financial impact of the area as that spill caused!

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I took pictures of said tree back in 83 when I was here on vacation. Back then, nobody bothered me about it, so I don' know if that restriction was in place, or not ( not that it would have made a difference)!

LensWork

The tree of which you speak is the world-famous Lone Cypress along the 17-mile drive: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/17-Mile_Drive

The tree was copyrighted as part of the logo of the Lone Cypress Company, a subsidiary of the Japanese resort company Taiheiyo Club Inc. that owned the Pebble Beach Golf Club from 1990-1999.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Apparently it is more complicated than that. A drawing of the tree is part of the logo, and the company now claims that any commercial use of a likeness of the tree is covered, but they don't try to prevent amateurs from photographing it ... assuming they've already paid $9.75 to drive on the private road leading to it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_Cypress
http://www.latimes.com/travel/la-tr-postcards-lone-cypress-20130519-dto-htmlstory.html

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Not quite accurate. The Lone Cypress is not copyrighted, but has been registered as the trademark of the Pebble Beach Company. You can take all the photos of it you want, but they will go after you if you try to sell prints of it, or drawings or paintings, for that matter.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

So the guy shows up with lighting accessories, big dSLRs and big lenses, and a big crowd, for the express purpose of taking the pictures there, and he's carping because they wrote him a ticket. What did he think was going to happen? The law is clear, he needed to get the permit.

If your a visitor and you take a few pictures with your iPhone for your vacation scrapbook, you don't need a permit, and nobody will care.

There is a lot of production in the greater Los Angeles Area, it can be disruptive to local activities, and production companies are making money in the process, the cities want their cut, so many cities, entities, areas, require a permit be obtained in advance. Welcome to LA.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

You mean this one? The Lone Cypress? No permit needed.

(Download)

Kuzano

I don't think that's it..

That looks like the "Cypress and a Nearby Friend".... A little farther down the road. I drove that road a number of times when I was stationed at Fort Ord. I also did guard duty at the Presidio of Monterey. We raced 3/4 ton and Deuce and a half trucks on the Laguna Seca race track during the week for Truck Driving School.

I recall the Lone Cypress as being a "lone" cypress.

AlohaBob Loc: Los Angeles, CA

I live very near La Canada; what are you referring to regarding the scum b...? I haven't heard of any photo restrictions there, although they are hell on freeway usage and retail :)

Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

the referenced scum bureaucrats have backed off on their onerous rules and endless greed, due to severe public anger and widespread criticism:

http://www.lcf.ca.gov/administration/film-permits

AlohaBob Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Wow! Is this the backed off version???