Re: Photography and the Law

"Marcus Fox" <please-reply-via-newsgroup-th@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in 
message news:tY-dnTZYBqRSsb7VnZ2dnUVZ8qSnnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "MC" <qwert@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:1210263584.25047.0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "Marcus Fox" <please-reply-via-newsgroup-th@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> message news:NYmdnVm_IM_8vr7VnZ2dnUVZ8vCdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > I'm referring to English Law.
>> >
>> > I'm aware that the current laws on photography permit anyone to
> photograph
>> > anything as long as it's in a public place (subject to the exclusions

>> > on
>> > photos of children at the beach and security installations.
>>
>> No law saying you cannot photograph children (or anyone else for that
>> matter) on a public beach.   Society tends to feel uncomfortable about
>> children being photographed in that situation so most photographers
tend
> to
>> steer clear.
>>
>> > What is the case as regards photography in places where the public
are
>> > generally permitted, but may or may not have to pay entry, or have
the
>> > owners refuse to admit them for any reason. Assume that photography
is
> not
>> > expressly prohibited, what is the situation should someone end up
being
> in
>> > your photo but object to having their picture taken? Places like
>> > supermarkets, hotels, swimming pools, museums, down at your local
pub,
> etc
>> >
>>
>> These places are "private property" and not public places.  You may
be>> 
>> should abide by that ruling.
>
>> invited inside but you abide by their rules.  If they say no photos
then
> you

> I'm aware of that, but I said in the OP "Assume that photography is not
> expressly prohibited" which indicates that the owners have not commented

> on
> photography. I'm referring to other patrons of the establishment having
a
> problem with it. If I'm taking photos of my subject, do I have to be 
> careful
> not to get them in shot? Or can I just snap away?
>

You can "snap away" until said patrons complain to the proprietor who may 
tell the photographer to stop.  It is also possible the proprietor could 
even offer the complainer the option to leave the premises if they do not 
like the chance of ending up in a photo.  Best thing is to approach the 
proprietor and ask permission.  They may give permission with strings
(i.e. 
no people photos) of they may just let you get on with whatever you want. 
Best to ask all the same.

>
> Is "to sell newspapers" not a commercial purpose?

Depending on the circumstances but news is generally "fair game". 
However, 
recently J K Rowling won a court battle to stop a photo of her child being

published when a "pap" photographed her pushing said child in a pushchair.

I would imagine Fred West would be considered "fair game", however.

MC