Photography on trains. Illegal?

[chuckles1066]

A photo taken between mates wouldn't be a problem however a photograph taken deliberately of a stranger could and should be seen as a problem

That sort of attitude is exactly why Jellyfish Britain is alive and well.

If you're in a public place then you're fair game. The police have a bit of a problem with it at the moment, YouTube is awash with Plod telling bystanders that it's "against the law" to photograph them and quoting S43/44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

It isn't that difficult to grasp.....unless you want a sort of pardoxical world where you're prepared to appear in public but you want complete privacy?

 

[Bungle73]

The thing is, street photography (a lot of the time including taking photos of random people in the street) is a perfectly legitimate photographic activity. But those, legitimate, photographers that practice this don't try to hide what they are doing.

Those pics would be illegal in Germany. If memory serves, it's illegal to publish pictures of people without their permission, even when taken in a public place.

Then how do TV companies, newspaper photographers, etc. do their job?

 

[Chrisgr31]

Does masturbation include doing it in the toilet or just in public?

Why on earth would you want to do it in a train toilet?

 

[Hyphen]

He's clearly a rather weird old man.

I've seen this (or another similar) bloke at Nottingham station before. To all intents and purposes he looked like any other enthusiast taking pictures of trains or the station, except he was paying very close attention to some of the women on the station.

My sister and I, sat onboard the Northern to Leeds awaiting its departure were watching him out the window. What gave him away was that a) there were no trains in any of the angles of photo he was taking and b) he tended to move away very quickly once the 'subject' became aware or moved on, or when station staff came close.

I ended up reporting him to the BTP and the guard on the train (who contacted control), though I've no idea of the outcome. The guard was certainly aware of a photographer, but unless you were actually looking at what he was doing, he can't have looked out of place.

 

[bluenoxid]

Leaving aside the questionable motives of that particular Flickr user, anyone can take a photo of anyone else in or from a public place though - permission of the subject is not required. If one was so inclined, one could - quite legally - take a photo in my street and even if I am in the front garden and in-shot, there is nothing I can legally do to prevent that.

Within the realms of the law of course. There is Voyeurism as well (although if you were to claim it in your front garden, you would be going nuts)

 

[Beveridges]

Just read this on Twitter........

EverydaySexism ‏@EverydaySexism 13m

.@btp_uk 1. You CAN report harassment/assault/groping/masturbation/being followed/photographed on transport and it WILL be taken seriously.

I can agree they they are all reprehensible acts except photography. Am I wrong?

Maybe I should report being "snapped" to BTP and see what response I get.

If it is illegal then the law has been broken trillions of times you only need to see the amount of photos on the Internet and Christ knows how many more are in private Train Spotters albums.

 

[MK Tom]

Those pics would be illegal in Germany. If memory serves, it's illegal to publish pictures of people without their permission, even when taken in a public place.

I'm assuming that only refers to intentional photographs of that person, if it even exists at all. Otherwise, was I breaking the law by taking this shot?http://www.flickr.com/photos/50337784@N04/8878438070/

Pretty sure I wasn't... a quick Flickr search for 'Koln Hauptbahnhof' turns up around 200 people in shot in the first six results.

As has been said already, the guy on Flickr I linked to earlier is clearly photographing women directly. Any law would need to distinguish between intentional photographs of human beings and photographs of scenery that humans happened to walk into.

 

[Bungle73]

Why on earth would you want to do it in a train toilet?

I will refrain from making the obvious joke about some enthusiasts being a little too obsessed with trains.

 

[quarella]

How attitudes change over time. http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Girl-Street-Bedside-Book/dp/0951769103/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1374873349&sr=8-2&keywords=Robert+jowitt Published 1991. Given by my mum to my dad some years ago.

 

[jon0844]

At least most of the pages aren't stuck together.

 

[tinstaafl]

I'm assuming that only refers to intentional photographs of that person, if it even exists at all. Otherwise, was I breaking the law by taking this shot?http://www.flickr.com/photos/50337784@N04/8878438070/

Pretty sure I wasn't... a quick Flickr search for 'Koln Hauptbahnhof' turns up around 200 people in shot in the first six results.

As has been said already, the guy on Flickr I linked to earlier is clearly photographing women directly. Any law would need to distinguish between intentional photographs of human beings and photographs of scenery that humans happened to walk into.

Info seems difficult to come by, but here's a general idea:

http://guidedmunich.com/german-privacy-laws/

I guess, strictly speaking, you were breaking the law when you published the photo, according to those guidelines. However, as you were obviously taking a photo of a tram, not the woman in the photo, I would hope common sense would prevail!

 

[Stats]

All photography is prohibited on Tyne and Wear metro premises unless prior authorisation has been given.

 

[The Barlow Boy]

41 posts and no-one's mentioned a bye-law yet.

 

[ex-railwayman]

Info seems difficult to come by, but here's a general idea:
http://guidedmunich.com/german-privacy-laws/

I guess, strictly speaking, you were breaking the law when you published the photo, according to those guidelines. However, as you were obviously taking a photo of a tram, not the woman in the photo, I would hope common sense would prevail!

That's a very interesting article, I've been to various German cities on numerous occassions over the last 30 odd years and never had any photographic problems in general, I'm sure if you visit various hosting sites for people's holiday snaps you'll find millions taken all across Germany over the last 50 years, many of them don't have pixellated faces of the locals to block their ID, I have quite a few of various Christmas Markets I've visited which inevitably featured hundreds of revellers, but, not once has anybody ever said anything, even though I've never published them publicly anywhere.
I suppose it's the context of the photo itself that could harbour legal possibilities if you published them for monetary gain, but, how would the person in the shot be able to sue you personally, if, they come from a different country and don't know who you are, would it be financially viable to spend time hunting down the perpetrators, and as you legally hold the copyright for that photograph anyway, under British law, what can they do about it, I wonder?

Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

 

[Chrisgr31]

How attitudes change over time. http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Girl-Street-Bedside-Book/dp/0951769103/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1374873349&sr=8-2&keywords=Robert+jowitt Published 1991. Given by my mum to my dad some years ago.

Must admit I am not sure whether there is anything wrong with the photos linked early in the thread. If you went to a photo exhibition would you find the photos put of place? The photo of the mother in the push chair for example is humorous.

Whether there is anything wrong with the photos depends on the motives of the photographer, but they looked artistic to me rather than voyeuristic, but I didnt see them all.

 

[starrymarkb]

That's a very interesting article, I've been to various German cities on numerous occassions over the last 30 odd years and never had any photographic problems in general, I'm sure if you visit various hosting sites for people's holiday snaps you'll find millions taken all across Germany over the last 50 years, many of them don't have pixellated faces of the locals to block their ID, I have quite a few of various Christmas Markets I've visited which inevitably featured hundreds of revellers, but, not once has anybody ever said anything, even though I've never published them publicly anywhere.
I suppose it's the context of the photo itself that could harbour legal possibilities if you published them for monetary gain, but, how would the person in the shot be able to sue you personally, if, they come from a different country and don't know who you are, would it be financially viable to spend time hunting down the perpetrators, and as you legally hold the copyright for that photograph anyway, under British law, what can they do about it, I wonder?

Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

I suspect the authorities would be more interested in those taking photos for commercial gain... Certainly at the WGT festival in Leipzig you get lots of covert snaps of festivalgoers from locals and sightseers. (Though those chasing for rear shots of some of the shorter 'oops my arse' skirts were more then a bit creepy)

 

[Eagle]

41 posts and no-one's mentioned a bye-law yet.

6.2 No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.

6.8 No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway.

Howzat?

 

[MK Tom]

6.2 No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.

6.8 No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway.

Howzat?

When people normally do this in threads, it always reminds me of Rimmer quoting Space Corps directives.

6.2 seems to leave a little bit of room for opinion of what qualifies as those things.

 

[Eagle]

It doesn't really matter because it's illegal under the Real Laws anyway.

 

[Paule23]

It is not illegal to take photographs of people in a public place. As has been mentioned a train could be considered a private place, but it is the owner of the train who has the legal right to object to a photograph being taken. Even if the person objects to a photograph being taken,they have no legal right to prevent the photo being taken, although they are grey areas with harassment and the appropriateness of the image (for example the up skirt photos mentioned earlier in this thread would most definitely be considered harassment and the authorities would take a dim view of anyone taking such photographs).

There are some other considerations if the photograph is to be used commercially, where model release forms should be obtained for anyone who is easily identifiable in an image.

Interestingly, although railway staff may have the power to ask you to stop taking photographs on their property and remove you from the premises if you refuse to do so, they (and the police) have no power to ask you to delete photos you have already taken, this can only be done through a court order.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

It is not illegal to take photographs of people in a public place. As has been mentioned a train could be considered a private place, but it is the owner of the train who has the legal right to object to a photograph being taken. Even if the person objects to a photograph being taken,they have no legal right to prevent the photo being taken, although they are grey areas with harassment and the appropriateness of the image (for example the up skirt photos mentioned earlier in this thread would most definitely be considered harassment and the authorities would take a dim view of anyone taking such photographs).

There are some other considerations if the photograph is to be used commercially, where model release forms should be obtained for anyone who is easily identifiable in an image.

Interestingly, although railway staff may have the power to ask you to stop taking photographs on their property and remove you from the premises if you refuse to do so, they (and the police) have no power to ask you to delete photos you have already taken, this can only be done through a court order.

Photography / filming for Commercial use is a different ballgame on private property.
It is very important to get permission to do so.
Eg Blackpool's piers, open to the public, are private. Anyone using them for commercial use without permission (and payment!) will cost them a very pretty penny.

 

[bAzTNM]

Jeezo, that Flickr account is very creepy. Absolutely bone chilling.

 

[Aictos]

What on earth....

Agreed, tad creepy

 

[starrymarkb]

Don't type "candid" or "streetshot" into Flickr or Youtube then (I got quite involved in a debate about this on another site - needless to say I was very much against it!)

I do think that shots of the public going about their business can be done without getting into the realms of creepy. A key factor would be a mix of people being photographed (ie not just attractive women) and not describing them as "Platform Flowers" - It's not my thing though