Cameron has spent millions of the taxpayers money on the Leveson Enquiry which I am not even sure whether it has now concluded or not and yet the Sun aka Murdoch are behaving the same way as they always have.... i.e. the pictures of Prince Harry.

What the hell was the point of the enquiry seeing as it has no teeth whatsoever and if anyone really thought it would make the scumbag press think twice over their lack of morals they forgot that these people don't think like normal human beings, they are just pure and utter pond life... much like the politicians really!

Why waste the money especially as the country is struggling just a wee bit

 

just shoot murdoch in the face.
job done

 

Would have been a darn sight cheaper LOL

 

I didn't see the problem with printing the photos, considering they were all over the internet anyway and judging by the sales of the paper on that particular run, there was a public interest in them.

I would rather a free press.

 

murdoch has no morals just after making money and selling papers.

which he did.

 

Just like anything else with Cameron, as long as he can get away without actually having to do anything,that is fine with him!

Les

 

Until Leveson comes out with his recommedations we won't know. Personally I would liek the press regulated by an independent commision with real powers. The PCC is clearly not fit for purpose. I suspect even if he does recommend this, the Government will shy away from it, and we will end up with the same ineffective self regulation we have now.

 

Decorum, but more importantly - its not FREE press, as the Sun PAID someone to get the rights to publish those pictures.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/me...s-8079564.html

They still need to learn alot of lessons and this paying freelancers/whistle blowers etc for their pics/scoops/stories needs to end. Its not free press when its paying a bunch of barrel scrapers who are intentionally hunting around for dirt on people as a means of income. This is what got them into trouble with the phone hacking. When

This is one reason why I think copyright laws of publishing images or recording taken without consent of those featured within needs to be reformed. Especially when in a private setting (i.e in a hotel room).

 

In English? The photographer owns the copyright Does the BBC seek the consent of everyone in the background when they take news films in shopping centres?

 

You missed a bit:
And yes; If the person(s) within the photo/recording are used as the main focus of a publication or feature without their persmission in a private setting. Then I do think the law does needs reforming so that the photographer does not automatically assume or hold complete copyright.


The Sun paid the copyright holder to publish this. That In my opinion is not morally right.

 

Whether you like it or not, everyone's got to earn a living though.

 

Its a weak excuse to justify paperazzi scum and "kiss & tellers" though.

 

OK, I'll give you that, paparazzi are pretty low

 

Nice earner for leveson , money for old rope

 

I must be ill or something as I 100% agree with you. I have done my stint as a studio photographer and the number of times I got looked at all funny when I presented the subject with a release form giving them sole rights to the photographs.

The photographer should not by default own the sole rights to the pictures he or she takes, it's a nonsense to think that is right from a moral perspective.