On closer inspection, the whole matter seems specious, designed indeed to produce the reverse of what it purports to do.
I am not here concerned primarily with the wider matter of the state and other agencies collecting data for purposes of 'security', nor about the shabby semi-professional 'paparazzi' brawling with drunk minor celebs in car parks. What I'm worried about is the effect all this is having on bona fide amateur photographers, and which, if unchecked, will have an adverse effect on activists too.
I assume that most people such as yourselves taking videos or snaps on demos do not hold NUJ or news-agency passes, and even if you do, my recent experiences suggest they wouldnt be much help, for in modern times, we have a serious case of media-imitative behaviour, where endless news reports about celebrity court cases versus the press, where members of the public automatically assume they have the 'right' to threaten, abuse, attack equipment or otherwise prohibit the taking of photos in public places, when in fact the law (as i understand it) is still the opposite. There is no general law prohibiting the taking of any photo in a public place, whether or not it happens to be 'good manners'. Indeed, to seek permission before ever taking a snap would inevitably lose spontanaity, and would certainly herald the return of the tweedy society of 'please, thank you, sorry'. No, I certainly dont want that, and whilst I never take intrusive or compromising shots, I see no reason to suspend my legal rights for some other characters decorum ! You activists may feel the same way if some creep thinks he can come up to you, threaten you and smash your equipment, so this line of argument is actually in your interest too.
In the particular, recent, case I have in mind, I was attempting to take a photo of a shop-window, which, by any definition, is a public place, and shop-windows are staple fare of amateur photogrpahers (as a glance at any magazine will prove). To top it all, it was in a prime tourist spot of a major city where cameras have been commonplace for a century or more.
So what happened ? Having decided the window would indeed make an interesting theme, I proceeded to take a photo, using a mild tele-lens (about 70mm) from the opposite side of the road. Someone claiming to be the manager then crossed the road (there was no question of my having entered the shop), asked if I was 'from the press' (frankly I dont know what gave him such an idea) and proceeded to gyrate in a martial-arts style waving hands and feet about in the middle of the road, (probably posing or a red-belt at best but alarming still). I tucked the camera away (a typical amatuer type, if he'd bothered to check, certainly not a professional rig) because most insurance policies are so full of clauses on situations like this, you cant be sure of getting your money back. He seemed mildly shocked when I suggested that it was he who was acting illegally with seeming impunity on several counts: firstly, crossing the road constituted a challenge, reducing his rights in any altercation (which fortunately my calm behaviour prevented form happening}; secondly, common street-brawling and breach of the peace, thirdly, the possibility of criminal damage and actual bodily harm, had any of those flying feet landed, and so on. The worrying thing is what i termed imitative behaviour, as if all the recent coverage has given self important little people (like shop managers) rights ABOVE the law, while others are constrained in THEIR rights by interpretations of 'good manners'. To hell with that ! Note also, his bizarre assumption that I was 'from the press' seemed to exacerabate his agression; in fact, I was a visitor-shopper-sightseer for the day, and if that is the kind of thing the press have to put up with regularly, my sympathy for them increases somewhat!
I say to the alleged manager, that if you insist on having an interesting window in such an area, expect it to be snapped, and dont start acting like Alex in 'Clockwork Orange'. If a copper had happened to be passing at the time, i might have taken an option on MY legal rights for once ! As it was, I thought him rather pathetic, hence my witholding of incriminating details.

To emphasise, I write primarily about bona fide amateur photographers, not professionals or money making chancers like paparazzi. I certainly accept that on demos, other considerations come into play, and the wishes of the organisers should be respected as a rule. but activists, who are essentially amateurs too for the most part, should think about the implications of hostile public attitudes if allowed to go unchallenged.