Home Office Minister Tony McNulty MP has commented on the current legal situation regarding privacy.

"There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place."

Recently at an event I was asked about taking photographs of people in public and this concerned me, mainly because of how some people reacted and started quoting non existent legalities. So I thought I would clear a few things up, and put people straight on what a photographer can and can't do.

Firstly, the law is extremely vague in a lot of areas, and really needs updating and clearly defining what a photographer can and can't do. There is a petition underway to try and get the Prime Minister to clarify the laws surrounding photography in public places, if you want to participate go here http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/photographylaw/%23content and help make it happen. And in support there is this Early Day Motion EDM 1155  PHOTOGRAPHY IN PUBLIC AREAS, why not get your local MP to add their support.

Lets get to the nitty gritty, what can a photographer photograph in the United Kingdom?

They can photograph pretty much anything they want in a public place, and they can use them for commercial use if they wish. Private land is a different story, that could be trespass. Taking photos of certain nesting birds, copyrighted works of art, photographing money, certain buildings and parks, another is where national security is at risk. For the record there is no law against taking photos of children, although commonsense should prevail in most cases. There are a few restrictions I may have missed, but not enough to protect the public.

This is just a very brief overview; it would take quite a few pages to elaborate on the finer points of what a photographer can and can't do.

The problem is people are not clued about photographers and photos, what they don't realise is that it only matters what you do with the photograph after you have taken it. You may have seen photos of celebrities in magazines or papers, and they have tried to stop it from being published, now if they can't stop it, what chances have you? There are rare circumstances, but generally as I have said, everything is fair game in public. Remember Princess Diana or the girlfriend of Prince William, Kate being pursued by the paparazzi, no one is safe in public.

It is the government you should be angry at, for failing to make the law clearer, only then will things improve and we will all know where we stand. In fact it is double standards from the government, you only have to turn a corner nowadays and there is a CCTV camera somewhere pointing in your face, do you moan about your privacy then, no because you have been brainwashed into thinking it is there for your safety. And it does not stop there, shops, businesses, police, even the wardens use them, so why pick on a photographer who does something usually as a hobby and is more aware of people's feelings and considerate of their privacy.

One last thing, regarding photographers equipment, you can not take it off them, or delete the images; even the police would need a court order to do that. So be careful, it could be you facing prosecution and not the photographer.

I hope this has cleared a few things up, and the next time you are out in public, or at some event, smile, you may be on camera. If it really bothers you, the best way to deal with a photographer, is to be polite and request they not photograph you. This will achieve more than ranting and quoting non existent laws, and I am quite sure the photographer will be appreciative and honour your request.

If a chief constable is reading this, perhaps a comment would not go amiss, if only to either confirm or deny what is written is true, or at least within the law.

PS: I found this on the internet, it is a picture of me and my friends taken in 1963, I don't believe I gave permission for this to be on Manchester City Council Website, and they are making money from them, In fact how many more pictures of children are on the Council website. My point is this, I am extremely glad I found this picture and did not know it existed, and on the other hand it is an invasion of privacy, or is it. As I said before the picture was taken on a public highway in a public place, and also before we got so wrapped up in paranoia.

Picture of me and my friends (and no I am not telling you which one is me?)

Useful Links

UK Photographers Rights

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988