On 2010-05-18 17:07:40 -0700, "Peter" said:

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2010 09:16:01 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:
On 2010-05-18 05:29:38 -0700, Bruce said:

On Tue, 18 May 2010 04:12:29 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2010-05-18 00:41:41 -0700, Bruce said:

On Mon, 17 May 2010 16:45:41 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

You have confused "private property" with "private place." An airplane,
cruise ship, restaurant, sports stadium, or garden might well be
private property. But they are public places -- open to the general
public. As such, the burden of proof is on you to show that you have a
reasonable expectation of privacy in such places.


Everyone should beware amateur "legal experts" who post on Usenet
newsgroups.

ROFL! Such as yourself, you mean?


On the contrary, because I shoot images for a living, I have to know
where I stand in relation to the law. As a result, I pay for, and
take account of, specialist legal advice.

You, on the other hand, can give all the BS advice you want, because
you haven't any experience to tell you just how wrong you are. You
are completely out of touch with reality.

Actually, I also pay for specialist legal advice.

Okay, so my lawyer disagrees with your lawyer.


Mine is one of the UK's top intellectual property lawyers who also
lectures in IP law at two Ivy League universities and at the UK's top
law school.

I emailed him a copy of this thread. He called me to thank me for
giving him his best laugh so far in 2010 (it was your comments that he
found especially amusing) and asked me if he could use the discussion
in his lectures as a particularly good illustration of people's
ignorance about the law. I said that appeared to be almost a
definition of "fair use" and he laughed even more ...

You are truly hilarious. Congratulations!




If he was half the expert you claim him to be he would have pointed out
that laws differ in different jurisdictions.
IOW....................................

If he exists at all.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor