Anybody still labouring under the illusion that the UK is a land of liberty and democracy where no man is above the law etc etc may be a little disheartened by the following-
Guilty of photography
So here we have a women demanding her privacy and getting the state to back her up. The very same state BTW, which is planning its own little invasion of everybody's privacy-
The perfect knowledge
This is in addition to the ID/NIR which will eventually track each person from cradle to grave (or so they foolishly think) with a total audit trail of their lives.
Sleep well.
Justin.
Full Version: The legal status of ANY photography
Repost....late by a week.
QUOTE (Justinr @ Oct 5 2008, 06:36 PM) 
Anybody still labouring under the illusion that the UK is a land of liberty and democracy where no man is above the law etc etc may be a little disheartened by the following-
Guilty of photography
So here we have a women demanding her privacy and getting the state to back her up.
Justin.
Guilty of photography
So here we have a women demanding her privacy and getting the state to back her up.
Justin.
That is a pretty disturbing piece of news. How can taking a photograph constitute a 'breach of the peace'? As for something being 'unchivalrous' and therefore subject to legal action - it sounds absurd.
Allow me the pleasure of playing Devil's advocate for a moment here.
If you're allowed to photograph me without permission are you also allowed to display the picture? or sell it? or use it to promote any personal beliefs you have that I might not share? After all its your picture.
I think privacy is an issue that is sometimes overlooked by many.
QUOTE (Joe Behar @ Oct 6 2008, 09:27 PM)
Allow me the pleasure of playing Devil's advocate for a moment here.
If you're allowed to photograph me without permission are you also allowed to display the picture? or sell it? or use it to promote any personal beliefs you have that I might not share? After all its your picture.
I think privacy is an issue that is sometimes overlooked by many.
If you're allowed to photograph me without permission are you also allowed to display the picture? or sell it? or use it to promote any personal beliefs you have that I might not share? After all its your picture.
I think privacy is an issue that is sometimes overlooked by many.
Yes, your scenario raises important ethical and legal issues, and different countries seem to deal with them differently. What bothers me most is the terms of the legal action, as reported by the BBC. How is taking a photograph a breach of the peace? Did it have a terribly noisy shutter? Perhaps there's more to the story - or perhaps I just don't understand what a breach of the peace is.
This was discussed on the BJP site recently-
I was going to post a link to the thread concerned but apparently I'm not allowed to!
But anyway, here's an extract from Craig Zendals posting-
I think this incident perfectly illustrates the vagaries of a legal system.
2. Breach of the peace is the most common non-motoring offence brought before Scottish courts and is part of Scottish Common Law.
It has become a flexible charge, leading to criticism that it is a catch-all offence for police when none other is available. It was established before Acts of Parliament shaped Scotland's legal system.
Common law offences can be reinterpreted by judges' decisions as there is no statutory definition.
In 2004 a QC told five senior judges that an accused must cause fear and alarm to be guilty of breach of the peace.
Justin.
I was going to post a link to the thread concerned but apparently I'm not allowed to!
But anyway, here's an extract from Craig Zendals posting-
I think this incident perfectly illustrates the vagaries of a legal system.
2. Breach of the peace is the most common non-motoring offence brought before Scottish courts and is part of Scottish Common Law.
It has become a flexible charge, leading to criticism that it is a catch-all offence for police when none other is available. It was established before Acts of Parliament shaped Scotland's legal system.
Common law offences can be reinterpreted by judges' decisions as there is no statutory definition.
In 2004 a QC told five senior judges that an accused must cause fear and alarm to be guilty of breach of the peace.
Justin.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.