All Forum Comments
Comment by Anvh posted on Cameras, police, and the Computer Misuse Act 1990. at 21/10/2009 - 16:06
Comment by Anvh posted on Sigma lens problem at 21/10/2009 - 15:19
it can also be a Sigma issue since you use a newer camera the chip in the lens might need to be replaced.
Comment by Anvh posted on Sigma lens problem at 21/10/2009 - 14:28
As you can see, at no point does it give me the power to make you remove the image.The only power it gives me is under Section 44 of the stop and search act the power to ask to view your photos if I belive you to be in the process of carry out an offence, or planning to carry out an offence.
And if the police officer force you to remove them he is guilty of destroying evidence, if it truly is a terrorism act.
btw do you have a link to your act since I couldn't find anything you have in the one I had
I used www.opsi.gov.uk or isn't that the official one?
Comment by Anvh posted on Cameras, police, and the Computer Misuse Act 1990. at 21/10/2009 - 14:24
If a lot of objects are close to the plane of focus I can see that you might have trouble spotting on which the camera is focusing on.
Most of the time though that isn't the case and it is quite clear of the object is in focus or not.
Comment by Anvh posted on Pentax K-X Query re Viewfinder at 21/10/2009 - 12:09
The 350D, 400D, 450D and others of the series so look for a release that support them.
Comment by Anvh posted on Cable release at 21/10/2009 - 12:04
So I don't see the point of arguing that a camera is a computer will change that fact?
Sorry if I miss the point
Comment by Anvh posted on Cameras, police, and the Computer Misuse Act 1990. at 21/10/2009 - 12:02
Maybe it's the way I read it in combination with the way you worded it since I don't believe you meant that.
Comment by Anvh posted on Pentax 50-135 SDM at 21/10/2009 - 11:50
Stefan, the whole point of this thread is that there are differences of opinion as to what constitutes a computer.
G
Not that that gives me the freedom to go off topic though.
Although the OP also talked about removing photos from a camera and I reacted on that.
Comment by Anvh posted on Cameras, police, and the Computer Misuse Act 1990. at 20/10/2009 - 23:50
yes you're right that they contain the two so why do we almost only comment on form with photography?
Comment by Anvh posted on Content or Form at 20/10/2009 - 23:48
Anvh here's your link.
I think this is starting to stray from the point, so to get back to what is a computer.
I believe the OP is trying to come out under some laws that applies to photo cameras by saying that his DSLR is a computer, all we are trying to say is that the law is not focused on the camera but on the photos them self so that it wouldn't matter if your DSLR is classified as a computer or not, since it's the photos that matter not the device.
I was recently reviewing reported incidents where police officers have demanded that a photographer should erase images taken in a city centre (usually) under the Terrorism Act.
A digital camera would, IMO, fit the description of a computer. It operates by means of hardware and software (or firmware if you prefer) which are capable of modifcation and programming. It processes digital data. It has digital storage media.
In view of this, if an unlawful requirement to erase images on the media card was made by an officer, rather than the somewhat doubtful (in my mind) suggestion of criminal damage, would an offence under the Computer Misuse Act 1990 be more appropriate?