Mastermind and the road to Damascus

[John Wilson]

2009/2/24 Roland Perry <lists@internetpolicyagency.com>:
> In article <a9f4d96f0902232345o3b715c2elc15b111918205a71@mail.gmail.com>,
> John Wilson <tugwilson@gmail.com> writes
>>
>> The sections which seem to be causing concern are section 76 of the
>> 2008 act
>> (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080028_en_9#pt7-pb3-l1g76)
>> which extends section 58 of the 2000 act
>> (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000011_en_6#pt6-pb1-l1g58)
>>
>> You will see that the 2000 act says that a "record" can be a
>> photographic record.
>
> Which is why I am puzzled that people say there is a specific and new
> prohibition on photos.


I don't think people are saying that (at least not people in the
professional photographic press) .

What the 2008 act does is make focus attention on the taking
photographs of certain classes of people. You could argue that this
was already an offence under the 2000 act, and I would not disagree
with you. However, the new act makes this explicit.

What professional photographers fear is that the explicit wording of
the new act will encourage the Police (and, in particular, the
Metropolitan Police) to use it to obstruct press photographers.

The met have form as far as press photographers are concerned - the