Photographer wins compensation from police
Discussion
Yeah - good to see, but this should really be a non-story in a civilised society where the law has always been clear.
I can understand the issues where photography is attempted on private land, like Trafalgar Square, under the Eye and on Ye Olde Wharfe de Canaries. (Which needs education.) And, of course, there has to be some systems and controls if the photography is a side issue to criminal activities.
I can understand the issues where photography is attempted on private land, like Trafalgar Square, under the Eye and on Ye Olde Wharfe de Canaries. (Which needs education.) And, of course, there has to be some systems and controls if the photography is a side issue to criminal activities.
K12beano said:
Yeah - good to see, but this should really be a non-story in a civilised society where the law has always been clear.
I can understand the issues where photography is attempted on private land, like Trafalgar Square, under the Eye and on Ye Olde Wharfe de Canaries. (Which needs education.) And, of course, there has to be some systems and controls if the photography is a side issue to criminal activities.
Since when has Trafalgar Square been private land? I can understand the issues where photography is attempted on private land, like Trafalgar Square, under the Eye and on Ye Olde Wharfe de Canaries. (Which needs education.) And, of course, there has to be some systems and controls if the photography is a side issue to criminal activities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_l...
Wikipedia said:
In general under the law of the United Kingdom one cannot prevent photography of private property from a public place, and in general the right to take photographs on private land upon which permission has been obtained is similarly unrestricted. However a landowner is permitted to impose any conditions they wish upon entry to a property, such as forbidding or restricting photography. Two public locations in the UK, Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square have a specific provision against photography for commercial purposes without the written permission of the Mayor,[2] and permission is needed to photograph or film for commercial purposes in the Royal Parks.
Trafalgar Square is technically belonging to Queenie in a specific way, IIRC. Not the same as public land, anyway.
Point is, try and set up a tripod there....
My examples were deliberately varied - the Eye is subject to some copyright issues, so not so much whether you take a picture of it (although, again, don't try and get a tripod out underneath it), but what you do with it, Canary Wharf more to do with getting a camera out in the first place.
Point is, try and set up a tripod there....
My examples were deliberately varied - the Eye is subject to some copyright issues, so not so much whether you take a picture of it (although, again, don't try and get a tripod out underneath it), but what you do with it, Canary Wharf more to do with getting a camera out in the first place.
Agreed there will be genuine cases where certain locations are sensitive to photography from a security POV.
Commercial photography is another area where it's always a good idea to research the location and seek permission where required, but it's the public or an amateur photog taking pictures in public places for their own consumption which seems to be threatened and this has to change.
Commercial photography is another area where it's always a good idea to research the location and seek permission where required, but it's the public or an amateur photog taking pictures in public places for their own consumption which seems to be threatened and this has to change.
[quote=K12beano]Trafalgar Square is technically belonging to Queenie in a specific way, IIRC. Not the same as public land, anyway.
Point is, try and set up a tripod there....
[quote]
Is that purely because it would be futile due to how busy it is? Or does the use of one's tripod mean that the image must be being taken for commercial reasons [misconstrued/negligence by officers/officials?]? I read nothing there to suggest personal comsumption was restricted.
It's sobloody confusing - I must have been lucky when photograghing the Eye - I was all over it, around it and took shots from inside it (granted, no tripod) without any issues at all.
Back on topic - 'bout time common sense/decency prevailed!!
S
Point is, try and set up a tripod there....
[quote]
Is that purely because it would be futile due to how busy it is? Or does the use of one's tripod mean that the image must be being taken for commercial reasons [misconstrued/negligence by officers/officials?]? I read nothing there to suggest personal comsumption was restricted.
It's so
Back on topic - 'bout time common sense/decency prevailed!!
S
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff