Reposted from another thread, but here's my take...
Now, it's been a while since I read the Act and I do need to refresh my memory, but IIRC the Data Protection Act only applies to certain quite closely defined categories of data. These are broadly called "personal details" and include e.g. names, addresses, transaction details, medical records, etc. Further, the reason for which these details were taken can also be relevant to whether the DPA applies.
(Note that naming someone is not enough: the name has to be associated with other pieces of "personal data" to be applicable under the Act.)
Whether or not data is held in a database or not is irrelevant, e.g. the DPA applies to written records too.
Now, as I say, it's been a while, but I don't think that you will find that the John West video is covered under the Data Protection Act. Unless, of course, UKIP signed a contract with Mr West saying that it would be entirely private. Even then, it would not be a criminal case, but a civil case.
As I say, I might be wrong but, as I recall, there are no published details of John West on that video material that would fall under the DPA.
__________________
Unio Europaea delenda est
|