Passports: HOME | EUROPE | AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA and OCEANIA | ASIA | AFRICA | OTHER DOCUMENTS
National Anthems:[ www.national-anthems.net ] ++
Travel:[ Europe ] [ Asia ] [ USA-Canada ] [ Latin-America ] [ Africa ] [ Australia ] [ more ]
[ Australia legal ] [ U.K. legal ] [ U.S. visa ] [ Immigration ] [ Marriage based U.S visa ]



Re: Photography and the Law Posted on: Sun, 11 May 2008 09:15:26 +0100

On 2008-05-09 16:56:56 +0100, Chris H said:
>>
>> While definitions may vary, for most purposes a "public place" is defined as
>
> Definitions in LAW do not vary and "what most people think" is usually wrong.
>
>> including any place to which the public have access as of right or by
>> invitation, express or implied.
>
> But for THIS Purpose a public place is somewhere that is not owned by
> some one who can state a preference for photography..
>
> The Churches are MOST DEFINITELY private property and can not permit
> the taking of photos.
>
> Actually I am cheating as the March 2009 Digital Camera Magazine have
> a many page article on UK law and photography and I am referring to
> that. So it is not idle speculation on my part.

I wouldn't take that article as gospel as they solely used English law
and forgot to mention that there are slight differences to the law in
Scotland. I did point this out to them but got no response.

1494400. Re: Photography and the Law
1494406. Re: Photography and the Law
1494409. Re: Photography and the Law
1494419. Re: Photography and the Law
1494430. Re: Photography and the Law
1494434. Re: Photography and the Law
1494436. Re: Photography and the Law
1494437. Re: Photography and the Law
1494441. Re: Photography and the Law
1494454. Re: Photography and the Law
1495478. Re: Photography and the Law
1495516. Re: Photography and the Law
1495522. Re: Photography and the Law
1495523. Re: Photography and the Law
1495577. Re: Photography and the Law
1495657. Re: Photography and the Law