Author: Tim JacksonTim Jackson Date: Jan 29, 2010 01:05
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:50:25 +0000, GP Hardy wrote...
> "Tim Jackson" wrote...
>
>> Additionally, wedding photos [*] would be covered by section 85 of the
>> Act. http://tinyurl.com/yh78tnc
>> This says that if you commission a photo or film for private and
>> domestic purposes, then you have a so-called "moral right". >
> Thanks, Tim - and everyone else who responded.
>
> Is the "moral right" the same thing as the breach of confidence mentioned by
> Tim, below?
I assume you mean the post by peterwn.
I don't know the 19th century precedent he mentions, but the law on
confidentiality has moved on a long way since then. For example, the
Douglas/Zeta-Jones case that I alluded to helped to develop the law on
confidentiality towards establishing that there is a right to privacy in
appropriate cases. I suppose it might also be brought to bear in a case
about less public, domestic wedding photos where appropriate.
| 
