Google's Street View Meets Resistance In France

Ian Lamont writes "Google has begun to scan the streets of Paris as part of its Street View service, but the company may be hindered from publishing them unedited. The reason? French privacy laws. Google may be forced to blur faces or use low-resolution versions of the photographs. The Embassy of France in the US has a page devoted to French privacy laws, that says the laws are needed to 'avoid infringing the individual's right to privacy and right to his or her picture (photograph or drawing), both of them rights of personality.'"

Comments

Ask Yahoo if they need to obey local laws

[Infonaut]

They lost in the French Nazi auction case, which established the precedent that even big American Internet companies have to abide by national laws. The excuse that the Internet is some sort of separate place, or that national laws have no clout in the Internet Age died right then and there, in 2000.

"Providing those details would be inappropriate"

[tmk]

Google Street Maps was not welcome in Australia, too. But the newspaper "The Australian" had an interesting idea: the asked Google for the addresses of the Google managers.

While Google has defended the project, the internet company baulked when The Weekend Australian requested the personal details and addresses of the group's key figures to allow the paper's photographers to take pictures of their homes. "Providing those details would be completely inappropriate," said Google spokesman Rob Shilkin.

Re:Easily contourné

[mrbluze]

Where is the big ethical problem here? I just don't see it.

You don't actually have permission to take photos of any faces in public. It's the same law in other countries. People have to consent to having their picture taken. Of course there is spillage and people unwittingly enter millions of tourist happy-snaps.

But if I take photos with identifiable faces and publish them on my blog or website or whatever, the people who own the faces can claim offense if I didn't ask them first.

Where is the big ethical problem here? I just don't see it.

The big ethical problem is that if there aren't these controls on how your photo/voice/identity is used, then people get exploited.

In many countries, you are not even permitted to photograph the front lawn of someone's private residence, even though it is the 'public face' of his home. Not everybody wants their stuff photographed, thank you very much.

Re:that may not mean what you think

[SerpentMage]

No here is the item:

2. By taking, recording or transmitting, without his or her consent, the picture of a person who is in a private place.

When you take pictures on the street of somebody in a window of their house that is considered private. Google does that and hence is violating the law.