Updated on
A building can stand empty and still belong to someone. That is the most important starting point for urbex. A broken fence, an open door or an address on a forum does not give you the right to enter.
Here I discuss issues that come up when photographing abandoned buildings. Which law applies in a particular case depends on the country, the property, its use and what actually happens. There is no single general urbex rule covering the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and France.
Permission before a visit
Ask the owner or an authorised manager for permission. Agree which buildings and rooms you may visit, whether you need an escort and whether you may publish the photographs. Someone who once sneaked inside cannot give you permission.
Permission for an open day does not automatically cover a later visit. An agreement with a former manager does not remain valid once they are no longer authorised to act for the owner. Several EOSfoto reports show just how temporary such opportunities can be.
No forced entry does not mean permission
Older urbex texts sometimes claim that there is only a problem if you break something open or take something. That is too simple. Entering or remaining on land or in a building can be unlawful or a criminal offence even without causing damage.
In the Netherlands, provisions concerning unlawful entry, squatting and prohibited access may be relevant, depending on the situation. These provisions have different requirements. It is therefore equally wrong to automatically call every photographer in an empty building a squatter.
In Germany, section 123 of the Criminal Code covers, among other things, unlawful entry into homes, business premises and enclosed property, and failing to leave when required by an entitled person. “I did not damage anything” is no general exemption there either.
For Belgium and France, consult the rules applicable there. I do not reproduce old foreign legal quotations and penalties as though they were automatically still current. For a particular visit, current information and permission matter more than a convenient passage on an urbex website.
A camera does not change the rules
Photography may be a good reason to request permission. It does not create a separate right to enter any building. A camera bag also does not prove that everything done during a visit is allowed.
Damage, forced entry, taking objects and entering rooms outside the agreed area are separate issues. Having no intention of stealing does not automatically make it permissible to move property or bypass a barrier. Leave when an authorised owner, manager or authority instructs you to do so.
Permission and safety are different questions
An authorised visit may still take place in a building with restrictions. An attractive photograph does not show which floor has been condemned or which part of an installation still works. Follow the agreed route and the manager’s instructions. An unfamiliar situation is no reason to assume everything will be fine.
After taking the photograph
Publication also needs care. Do not show legible patient information, letters, addresses or other personal details. Consider privacy and possible image rights when people are recognisable. Permission to visit a property does not automatically settle every right for every use of the photographs.
Conversely, the CC BY licence on my own photographs grants rights to those photographs only. It does not grant entry to a building or replace permission from other rights holders.
The practical conclusion is less spectacular than some urbex stories: arrange a visit and ask what is possible. If you need to know how the rules apply to your particular situation, seek advice from someone who can assess the applicable law and the facts.
Comments