Ian Jelf wrote:

In message , Chris Tolley
writes
Human rights legislation may be close to conferring some nearby rights.
This is the problem thought. Such legislation may be in the pipeline
or maybe not (I don't know). But that is important is that it *isn't*
there yet and this is what people believe gives them certain rights
which they do not in fact have.

The legislation is there, but the case law isn't. People have a right to
privacy under human rights law. At present that right extends
effectively to situations in which information about them may not be
made public without their consent. So, it isn't right to say that people
can't take pictures, but it is right to say that there are certain
things they might then do with those pictures that might give rise to
complaints from the people featured in them, and some of those
complaints might be pursued under law.

Some years ago, I was a bit surprised when someone approached me at
Paddington and actually asked if he could take my picture (I was
wearing mirrored sunglasses, and he wanted to capture the reflection
of the roof) but I'm aware from time to time that there are people
taking photos of me, some of whom seem to be doing it openly, while
others seem to be trying to pretend they aren't.
As a matter of fact, if I'd been asked under such circumstances, I'd
have politely declined. But I'm not sure how far any of us can go
in England to prevent photos being taken which include us. And
enforcing such things is impossible.

Think of all the photos taken every day ion Central London (or Bath,
Stratford-upon-Avon, Oxford, York, etc.) And how many people appear
in them. Legislating for this is just impossible. I realise there's
a difference between being a "subject" of a photo and being
incidental within it. But actually defining the difference in law
would be very difficult, wouldn't it?

Well, since as noted there is not a general right not to be
photographed, the question doesn't immediately arise in that vanilla
case. However, suppose you take a picture of Warwick Castle, and there
are some people in the foreground, one of whom is wearing a green jacket
and whose features may be recognisable, You might publish the picture
with a caption "Warwick Castle" and be okay. But if you published the
picture with a caption saying "here is X.... Y..... (wearing the green
jacket), the well-known paedophile, stalking children at Warwick
Castle", then you can expect X.... Y.....'s legal representatives to be
in touch in short order.

As for me, I'm much happier photographing trains.
As am I with buses and interesting buildings. But people do get in the
way!
Indeed. Sometimes deliberately.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632855.html
(33 054 at Reading, 17 Jan 1981)