As I understand there are there limitations for photographing Uluru

1.  No photos at all of sacred sites (which are a small part of the rock
overall and from a practical stand point this rule only applies when you
are near the rock - there is no way of excluding sacred sites from your
photos if you are further away.)
2.  For commercial photography you need to get a permit and pay some
relatively small fee.
3.  No commercial photography of the sunrise side.  You can take all the
personal photos you want and you can give them away, but you can't sell
them.

I don't see any problem with these limitations.  A bit of planning ahead
will keep commercial photographers out of trouble, and in my opinion the
sunset side probably provides better photo opportunities.  Besides, in a
close up its pretty hard to tell one side of the rock from the other.

There is one further limitation which is a bit of a concern from a
journalistic view point in that commercial photography can not give a
"negative impression" (forget the exact wording).  This is something
that needs to be resolved.  A journalist should be able to report the
true situation.

Any arguments that tourism numbers will drop because commercial photos
are not available are just plain stupid.  I can just imagine someone
cancelling their holiday because they couldn't **buy** (limitation is
for commercial photographs only) photos of the entire rock.  Just
ridiculous.  Like saying you won't visit Washington because you've only
ever seen photos of the front of the Whitehouse.....

Like Miro said "Buy the postcard and say you went."

Australian Photography Magazine covered this topic in an article a few
months ago.  I believe that the photographer had to purchase a "photographic
access" pass to be able to cover additional areas of The Rock but there were
still many angles that could not be photographed.

Michael