The standard test applied to photographic images is "does the person being photographed have a reasonable expectation of privacy?". This test is always contextual and environmental (i.e. consider all the relevant circumstances).So here's a genuine question. Obviously there is rightly a law to prevent perverts taking upskirt photos (or any photo) that are intimate of strangers. But has this weirdo done anything legally wrong. I'm asking for legality not opinion.
He could have possibly pixilated the side of her face. But it strikes me that we live in an increasingly odd era of social norms, where as we have no consensus we probably need new laws. I've seen social media post that are full of images of random folk, on the tube at the airport on buses. These images are for all kind of reasons. Fashion, 'hotness' all kind of BS.
My partner an I were in Gambia a while back and got very annoyed at a bunch of American and Israeli tourists that spent the whole time taking photographs of Gambian children without ever once seeking consent . We need a wider conversation on this because thus woman's mock outrage obscures normal ( no gooner fame junkies) women and mens right to privacy.
Taking a photo of a child in the changing room of a public swimming pool is hugely problematic because of the vulnerability of the child, and the expectation of privacy is far more reasonable than standing in a 60,000 crowd at a sports stadium. A celebrity who earns income from being in the public eye will typically have a less reasonable expectation of privacy compared with Joanne Public (where the circumstances are otherwise the same).
Unless the legislation has changed recently, a photographer would only be criminalised if their conduct amounted to harassment or if they were engaging in upskirt / peeping Tom acts. The intent of the photographer is also relevant. Were they intending to perve, harass, intimidate or taking a photo of someone out of curiosity, fun, or attraction?
It's complex and needs to be carefully considered on a case by case basis.
Also bear in mind the ramifications of policing from a moral standpoint (morality policing) rather than a criminal standpoint (statutory policing). A person's behaviour may be unsavoury but doesn't automatically mean they should be criminalised.