NSW Photographers Rights. May 8, 2. 01. 6Australian street photography legal issuesby Andrew Nemeth BSc Hons LLB MTeach. Introduction. The following by is an analysis of legal issues which apply to street photography in NSW Australia. Nothing But The Truth George Kershaw Pdf To Doc' title='Nothing But The Truth George Kershaw Pdf To Doc' />Every great baseball team hits a skid at some point or another the season is too long and too taxing for even the best teams not to. Even the 1998 Yankees, probably. George Glenn Jones September 12, 1931 April 26, 2013 was an American musician, singer and songwriter. He achieved international fame for his long list of hit. Nothing But The Truth George Kershaw Pdf CreatorNothing But The Truth George Kershaw Pdf DownloadCreated in response to objections to my Sydney Unposed project, it is written from a photographers perspective, with a focus on what rights shooters have and dont have when it comes to candid photographs of people. Please note it is not an encyclopaedia on every possible aspect of photographic law, so it does not attempt to address issues like anti terrorist legislation, council photography permits or National Park commercial photo restrictions. Instead the sole purpose of the following is to discuss legal issues which apply to people photography only. In case you are wondering, I am a photographer and qualified solicitor UNSW 1. Sydney law firm, before leaving the profession in 1. So the following is based on an ex practitioners understanding of Intellectual Property and Privacy Law, and not just the usual Internet Hearsay. BTW when citing this article, please use http photorights. Recent Updates 2. Nov Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1. Your right to take photographs. In Australia the taking and publication of a persons photograph, without their consent or knowledge but within the limitations outlined below, is not an invasion of privacy, nor is it in contravention of case or statute law. Privacy advocates may disapprove, but in this country people photography has always been, and for the moment remains, a perfectly legal thing to do. High Courts approveIn Australia most forms of unauthorised photography have in fact been authorised since the 1. High Court decision in Victoria Park Racing v. Taylor 1. 93. 7 5. CLR 4. 79 at p. 4. This was reaffirmed recently in ABC v Lenah 2. HCA 6. 3, where the Court ruled that despite the passage of decades since Victoria Park, any concept of a Tort of invasion of privacystill does not exist in Australia. As Justice Dowd put it with ruthless clarity in R v Sotheren 2. NSWSC 2. 04 A person, in our society, does not have a right not to be photographed. Photography is not yet a Crime. Many photographers are fed up with being treated like perverts. In the last few years things have deteriorated to such an extent that JPG Magazine devoted an entire issue to it in February 2. People with cameras bear witness to the everyday dramas of ordinary people. We capture our world to help us understand it. We are not terrorists. We are not dangerous. And we are certainly not a threat. Likewise the Aug 2. New York Times blog Can You Take a Photography Anywhere. Or the lengthy article by John Reid and subsequent blog discussion, Talking Pictures Photography Is Not A Crime, on the Sydney Morning Herald website Feb 2. Ditto the 2. 01. 0 Sydney Photo Rights Rally plus UK websites Im a Photographer, not a Terrorist and Not A Crime. Similar sentiments have even led to the making of a documentary movie called Off Limits La rue zone interdite 2. Featuring interviews with Marc Riboud, William Klein, Willy Ronis, Janine Niepce and Elliott Erwitt, it was directed by Gilbert Duclos the Quebecian street photographer who lost a 1. Supreme Court case concerning his photo of an art student sitting on a banks steps see the Canadian discussion below. No Federal Bill of Rights. A legacy of our convict past is that Australia has never had a Bill of Rights. Consequently there has never been any concept of a constitutionally protected Right To Privacy. Because of this, our common law has always rejected attempts to prohibit photography by merely claiming privacy rights see this Photos and surveillance FAQ by the Australian Government Office of the Australian Information Commissioner OAIC. Interestingly, Australia is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ICCRR, which means the Federal Government could in theory establish a statutory Bill of Rights by implementing the treaty via the External Affairs Power in the Constitution. That it has not been done is mainly due to politics, history and indifferent public opinion. Despite this, on the 6. Universal Declaration of Human Rights in December 2. Federal Government announced the creation of a 4 member consultation panel to look into the creation of a Bill of Rights charter for Australia. Maybe. One day. Implied Rights to Freedom of Speech. Analyse the constitution as fastidiously as you like, but you will not find anything on personal rights. Yet thanks to 1. 99. High Court discovered that, amazingly, media proprietorscitizens do have a few implied Rights to Freedom of Speech see this research note by Roy Jordan 2. So does this mean photographers can now use Freedom of Speech to counter restrictions on photography Unfortunately, no. In typical High Court fashion, our rights have been carefully limited to only matters regarding political discourse eg. Sydney anti pope protests in July 2. To quote Roy Jordan there are implied rights to free speech and communication on matters concerning politics and government, e. This is known as the implied freedom of political communication. Thats it. Which means for general ie. Freedom of Speech does not exist in Australian federal law. Victoria Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. This act was passed in 2. January 2. 00. 8. For the first time in an Australian State, it implemented most of the elements found in a typical Bill of Rights, including Freedom of movement, expression, assembly and association, Right to liberty and security and most importantly for photographers Protection of privacy and reputation. It is still too early to see what impact it will have on candid photography, but it is not unreasonable to expect someone will eventually use it to wage anti photo lawfare. A couple of important caveats 1 the VCo. HRa. R is jurisdictionally limited to Victoria and does not apply to the Commonwealth or any other state 2 the Australian Capital Territory has had its own Human Rights Act since 2. Limitations on photo rights. Air Canada Million Mile Program there. Just because unauthorised photography has not been generally prohibited, it does not mean it is a free for all. In NSW Anti Voyeurism, Defamation and Obscenity laws still apply, as do common law doctrines of Nuisance, Trespass, or statutory prohibitions arising out of the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act. The remainder of this article presents an analysis of these photo restrictions and limitations. For a similarly detailed overview in an Australian context, you may also wish to refer to Caslon Analytics note on Unauthorised Photographs, along with this Australian Arts Law Centre Unauthorised use of your image article. Anti Voyeurism Laws. The situation in NSW used to be that if photos were taken of people without their consent to provide sexual arousal or gratification, then photographers risked being charged with Offensive Behaviour under Section 2. G NSW Summary Offences Act 1. Section 2. 1G was however repealed at the end of 2. From 2. 00. 9 onwards, Peeping Tom photography in NSW is now addressed by Division 1. B of the NSW Crimes Act 1. Voyeurism and related offences provisions in sections. M. Note that Division 1. B does not generally apply to everyday candid photography.