The Real Doctor wrote:
On 24 Feb, 00:09, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:50:31 -0800 (PST), Boltar

I think he was, otherwise you could turn the argument around and say
people have no right to refuse to be photographed.
ITYF that in general they do not. OTOH they might have a number of
rights available to them WRT publication of any such photographs,
depending on the manner and purpose of such publication.

OK, you two, take out your cameras, go for a stroll round your local
town and insist on your right to take photographs of people form a
distance of, say, three feet. Be sure to point out to them that they
have no right to refuse to be photographed.

On the other hand, you could try wandering round Cambridge (or similar
place) in a college gown, evening dress, straw hat or some other "native
costume", and picking a fight with every tourist who tries to take a
photo of you. It'd be a sort of Rorke's Drift with Batman outfits.
Japanese to the southeast... Thousands of them.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK