Well, not everyone lives in the US.
The UK passed Human Rights Act 1998 in response
to the European Convention on Human Rights.
Anyway, Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998,
which covers freedom of expression, is much
weaker than the US First Amendment, having
many exceptions written in.
Article 10
Freedom of expression
1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall
include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information
and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of
frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the
licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2 The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and
responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions,
restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary
in a democratic society, in the interests of national security,
territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder
or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection
of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure
of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the
authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_3
On 27/09/2007, Matthew Brown <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's important to note that when we're talking
about commercial use in
the context of publicity & privacy rights, there are big exemptions
under US law: art and journalism, roughly. Editorial use (which
Wikipedia's use of such images certainly is) is in most cases exempt,
because of the First Amendment implications (doing otherwise would be
an unconstitutional restraint on free speech).
-Matt