The legal picture for amateur photographers

You’ve just seen that elusive celebrity, taken out your camera and from nowhere a menacing minder comes along and orders you to stop.

He may go as far as to demand you hand over your camera or tell you to delete that shot.

What do you do? Most of us may feel aggrieved but also intimated, so probably comply. Unsurprisingly we don’t know our rights in these situations.

This article will take look at what you legitimately can and can’t do ­ in most circumstances.

It is only an overview and by no means a definitive guide to your rights and it is not intended for commercial or professional photographers.

Restrictions on what we can photograph these days seem to increase daily. Schools forbid parents to take even the most innocent shots of school nativity plays; people are prevented from taking photos of well-known people at public events.

Most of what you are doing is perfectly OK ­ but what these officials do to you is not.

There is no law prohibiting taking a photograph in a public place. But as Professor Martin Cartwright, the associate dean of Wolverhampton’s School of Legal Studies, explains: “While there is no law against taking a photograph, there are other laws that you could be inadvertently breaking.”

Professor Cartwright says some are fairly straightforward, such as, indecent photos of a child and being an accessory to a crime ­ taking photos of an assault, for instance. Other laws can mean a total prohibition and some will depend on the circumstance.

The Terrorism Act 2000
If you want to find yourself in potentially serious trouble, take snapshots of anywhere designated a ‘prohibited place’.

You can guess some; Government defence buildings and places where munitions are stored. Others are not so easy. The list includes some railways and any place belonging to the civil aviation authority.

There are many more and, while it only applies to photographs that might be useful to the enemy, you have to bear in mind the general hysteria surrounding terrorism.

Yes, it is a threat but it has been reported that security guards have stopped people taking photos of London landmarks such as the London Eye.

As telecommunications offices can also be prohibited, do not be too surprised if you are stopped and investigated by the police if you take a snap of the Post Office Tower.

Protection from Harassment Act
But what if you are no trainspotter; you just love your celebrities. Well the first photo should be OK, no matter what those heavies say.

But if you keep snapping away, determined to get that once-in-a-lifetime photo you could alarm your subject and be considered a stalker.

“A photographer could fall foul of this Act if they seek to photograph someone against their wishes on more than one occasion,” says Professor Cartwright.

In England or Wales it is a criminal offence to photograph someone against their wishes multiple times and you could be imprisoned for up to six months or fined or both.

In Scotland it is not a criminal offence but an order could be made against you and a breach of that would be a criminal offence.

Private property and the right to privacy
The owner of private property has the right to make restrictions on what can and cannot be photographed. This is why schools can impose restrictions. However, there is no law against taking a picture of someone on his or her private property from a public place. If you took a picture with a powerful zoom lens you could be invading someone’s privacy, but there is no coherent law regarding this.

Breach of the peace and trespass
A breach of the peace could apply if you are bothering people and your picture taking is likely to result in a violent response from those around you. If you start taking photos without permission on private property, then you are trespassing.

In England this is only a civil offence but landowners and bodyguards are allowed to use reasonable force to eject you. But this doesn’t mean they can use violence

Human Rights Act 1998
According to Professor Cartwright, the law under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is at best in flux. In 2004, a court ruled that photos of Princess Caroline of Monaco did breach her right to a private and family life. Recently, author JK Rowling won a landmark victory over a photo of her four-year-old son.

Like this story? Spread the news by clicking below:

 del.icio.us     Digg this     reddit!