More on public videoing (and supposedly photography too)

yzfmike said:
St Pancras station IS a public place
Click to expand...


Technically, under the 1972 Criminal Justice Act (Sect 33), yes it is.

However the law has become far more nuanced than that, especially over the last 15 years or so, and the more recognised term is now either a private space with public
access or the slightly more catchy POPS - Privately Owned Public Space. Both of which amount to the same thing; ie that the owner has a measure of control over access and activity that would not exist in a truly public space, such as a public highway.

There's a decent explanation here, just scroll down to the UK part. The major caveat is that the article concatenates English and Welsh law with Scottish to an extent - which is obviously not correct.

blogs.law.ox.ac.uk

Privately-Owned Public Spaces: A Comparative Study of the Legal Responses to Their Development and A Proposal for Reform

blogs.law.ox.ac.uk blogs.law.ox.ac.uk
 
If you watch the interview by one of the news channels with Kavanagh, my take was that he comes across as a bit of a "cheeky chappy" type that is happy to "break a few rules" (his own words). I suspect one of the rules he treats as advisory is filming for commercial use on private property (that may well be a public space) that specifically has rules that say you can't unless you get permission.

His argument that he's in a public place (probably true) and freely allowed to film (probably false) is on shaky ground IMO. The Chinese folks (whether you like them or not) are (probably) correct in that he's not allowed to film, but also on shaky ground that they should reasonably expect privacy. Neither side is squeaky clean and if I were going to start a media campaign, I'd make sure I was white as snow.

There are a few other YouTubers who delight themselves going to police stations, industrial estates etc and taking photos/filming just so they can confront security and create drama for likes. It's just creating more problems & bad reputation for "normal" photographers/film makers.

:popcorn:
 
For me the issue at St Pancras station is the chinse group imposing their rules on the British public, and the police acting like private security for the chinse !

Then chinse do no respect nice people and there plenty of YouTube videos on what life is like living in china.
There is a big concern about chinse tech firms in the British economy, even Donald Trump had to tell the British government no to use Huawei for the 5G network.

Why are the Met Police not interviewing the aggressive chinse man for section 5 public disorder ! It amazes me how the Met police just can not seem to get any thing right over the last few years. Apart from ramming scooter thief's with police cars ( IMO this should have been done years ago ), and now actually taking shoplifting as a serious crime. Not dismissing the incident as goods or items may be under the £200 therefore no police action is required.

I am pretty sure I am on a rant here as I am so disappointed in the Met Police. As I can not understand what complete BS nonsense Kerry the wpc was telling Dr K, unbelievable diarrhoea from her month.

As for the public videoing in a public place, well there is plenty of information regarding public access on private property, of which the chinse group seem to just do what ever they wanted regardless of UK laws.
There has now been to complaints to YouTube about getting the video taken down from YouTube, I wonder who has complained.
Also the woman in the chinse group has now made her own youtube video of their version of the events. Even slowing down Dr K's voice to make him sound like a creepy old man !
The chinse communist party seem to have gotten involved in this situation are going after Dr K via social media.
I do hope MI6 are ding something about this !
 
Tysonator said:
I am pretty sure I am on a rant here as I am so disappointed in the Met Police.
Click to expand...


Well, um, yes you are.

However, your major problem is that these guys weren't Met officers. They were from the BTP, what with it being a railway station and all.

And if you are surprised at their actions regarding the Chinese, you obviously weren't watching the 2008 Olympic Torch Relay when it came through the UK.

PS - you might want to give your speelchucker a spin!
 
DemiLion said:
Well, um, yes you are.

However, your major problem is that these guys weren't Met officers. They were from the BTP, what with it being a railway station and all.

And if you are surprised at their actions regarding the Chinese, you obviously weren't watching the 2008 Olympic Torch Relay when it came through the UK.

PS - you might want to give your speelchucker a spin!
Click to expand...

LOL, typing a smart phone screen with fat finger syndrome !

Fair point about the police not being the Met and are BTP, who should know even more regarding the use of videoing at train stations.

The Torch Relay in the UK did the police a massive amount of positive PR, and they were actually liked by the general public. In my home town there were few coppers from my gym in the security detail running with the torch. They told me it was one of the best assignments they have ever had in the police.

I watch the news about what the chinse government were doing to it citizens, workers, and security regarding the 2008 Olympics was terrible.
 
Tysonator said:
The Torch Relay in the UK did the police a massive amount of positive PR, and they were actually liked by the general public. In my home town there were few coppers from my gym in the security detail running with the torch. They told me it was one of the best assignments they have ever had in the police.
Click to expand...


I'm not talking about the 2012 relay. That was absolutely epic.
I was working for TVP as their photographer and when I wasn't out on the road I was in either Silver or Gold command.

I was talking about 2008, when the Chinese security had a free hand in 'defending' the torch throughout Europe.

They were bad here and even worse in France.
 
The Blackbelt Barrister is correct. The station is a public place. Any station is (I'm railway staff and have been for 20 years). There is a difference between private property and a public place. (One location can of course be both simultaneously) and filming is permitted.

Filming at railway stations has long been on staff briefs I've read for years. There was a big thing about it in the early 2000s when digital media made it much easier to film and share.

We had incidences of trainspotters being told they couldn't film "for security reasons" which of course was a made up excuse. Like with any law enforcement there has to be reasonable suspicion that someone is committing an offence or intends to commit an offence before being asked to leave. They certainly can't have the camera or footage confiscated unless the police believe it to be relevant to evidence relating to a criminal act.

None of that applies to Brendan. The Chinese (or anyone, they just happen to be the focus or this story) present in a public space has no automatic right to privacy. They were in the wrong.

St Pancras request any large scale or public broadcast filming is authorised but this isn't a law. It's also a very grey area as BBB explained in his video.

EDIT: after the law clarification we actively invited trainspotters to help with reporting any problems in and around stations and made it clear they were welcome to film. The vast majority are well behaved. The Flying Scotsman issue is another mattern for another topic....
 
Last edited:
Thank you Typhoon7.

At last - someone willing to believe Daniel ShenSmith CeMAP, LLB (Hons), LLM, MSoM (Black Belt Barrister). What could he possibly know about law? He explained in detail, with case histories, why St Pancras station is a Public Place. Not good enough for the barrack-room lawyers on here who make the usual inaccurate, and unsubstantiated assertions to the contrary.

This is important because it has significant implications about the right to photography/video, and the expectation of privacy of people in the area.

I'm reminded why I rarely contribute to threads.
 
yzfmike said:
This is important because it has significant implications about the right to photography/video, and the expectation of privacy of people in the area.
Click to expand...
It's important to note though that whilst it may well be a public space, if it's private property, there may be rules that govern photographing/filming that need to be adhered to. A football grounds terrace (for example) may well be a public space but there are often quite strict rules about what you can and can't do with your camera - especially for commercial use. BBB's videos are excellent, but one needs to pay careful attention to his wording.

Screenshot 2024-01-26 195447.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Harlequin565 said:
It's important to note though that whilst it may well be a public space, if it's private property, there may be rules that govern photographing/filming that need to be adhered to. A football grounds terrace (for example) may well be a public space but there are often quite strict rules about what you can and can't do with your camera - especially for commercial use. BBB's videos are excellent, but one needs to pay careful attention to his wording.

View attachment 413074
Click to expand...
Seems to me that fees charged are discretionary (may change depending…) and that could include zero.

Whether fees are involved or not, I’m not seeing explicit or implied right to privacy (in a public place) mentioned.

YMMV of course…
 
yzfmike said:
Thank you Typhoon7.

At last - someone willing to believe Daniel ShenSmith CeMAP, LLB (Hons), LLM, MSoM (Black Belt Barrister). What could he possibly know about law? He explained in detail, with case histories, why St Pancras station is a Public Place. Not good enough for the barrack-room lawyers on here who make the usual inaccurate, and unsubstantiated assertions to the contrary.

This is important because it has significant implications about the right to photography/video, and the expectation of privacy of people in the area.

I'm reminded why I rarely contribute to threads.
Click to expand...


The implications aren't any more significant than what has already been discussed on this thread.

You have no 'right' to photography, other than those granted to you by the property owner as part of your licence to accessit.

Likewise you are afforded the same rights to privacy as anyone else under Art 8 HRA (as alluded to earlier).

As for case histories, if you look above I've shown case law to support my position.

By the way, next time you start throwing insults about - make sure that you are prepared to accept the reply in tenfold.
 
PS - do NOT conflate 'public place' with 'public ownership'. They are two very different things.
 
Just watched that vid of the commies objecting. I think it sums quite a few people up pretty well these days. They could have just moved away and continued their chat somewhere else but instead decided to impose themselves on others. Just about sums some of the police up too, make up an offence and bully people.

On the subject of Chinese commies. Years back I had a Kazakh GF and she hated the Chinese with a passion and she always used to say "Wait until they get out into the world. You'll see." I do have to say that I did also have a Chinese GF and she was lovely.
 
yzfmike said:
Thank you Typhoon7.

At last - someone willing to believe Daniel ShenSmith CeMAP, LLB (Hons), LLM, MSoM (Black Belt Barrister). What could he possibly know about law? He explained in detail, with case histories, why St Pancras station is a Public Place. Not good enough for the barrack-room lawyers on here who make the usual inaccurate, and unsubstantiated assertions to the contrary.

This is important because it has significant implications about the right to photography/video, and the expectation of privacy of people in the area.

I'm reminded why I rarely contribute to threads.
Click to expand...
Last time he was quoted on this forum he was wrong, ignoring points of law he was familiar with in the pursuit of clicks.

Short answer; no idea whether he’s right on this occasion but he’s a cock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top