Slashdot Mirror
Google Says Complete Privacy Does Not Exist
schliz writes "In a submission to court, Google is arguing that in the modern world there can be no expectation of privacy. Google is being sued by a Pennsylvania couple after their home appeared on Google's Street View pages. The couple's house is on a private road clearly marked as private property." Here is our previous story about Google Street View privacy issues.
If the photo had been obtained from space then there is no case. But if a google car drove down a private street that was marked private property then they do have a good case for trespass. Normally such roads are gated though.
If there was no sign, then Google did nothing wrong.
FTS: "The couple's house is on a private road clearly marked as private property."
At least read the summary.....
(on an unrelated topic, I have to wait more than 4 minutes between posts now. Excellent karma and no downmodded comment in weeks. Excellent system here, guys)
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Good thing they weren't actually IN anybody's house. Why let little details like that get in the way of an otherwise decent slashdot discussion though.
Let's see what happens when google street view tries to do this in Texas, where you can legally shoot someone for encroaching on private property to perform "criminal mischief"... I'm sure they'll agree that taking photos on private property counts as criminal mischief in Texas, assuming it's clearly posted as private property.
stuff |
It actually works the other way. The council I work for commissions the arial photography and sells it to google.
America, Home of the Brave.
Nope. The only legal requirement is that Google not set foot on property if it is marked as private property. Google can photograph it from a public street, or any other public land. They can fly over it. They can take pictures from a satellite. They can set up shop in a building across the street (with permission) and go paparazzi to their heart's content.
They simply cannot step onto the private property without permission.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
It's been awhile, but last time I had a ticket it was 1000 ft AGL. With permission you could go below that. I think news helicopters and air ambulances are examples of exceptions.
"in England and Wales there is an established legal Right to Wander".
No there isn't. The 'right to roam' act merely codifies access to land we already had access to.
To quote from the Ramblers' site (http://www.ramblers.org.uk/freedom/),
"This new legal right - or right to roam - provided by The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRoW), applies only to mapped areas of uncultivated, open countryside namely mountain, moor, heath, down and registered common land."
As someone who takes part in shooting activities in the country I'm fed up with dick heads who think they have a right to wander across the range! Private property is exactly that.
Maybe you're thinking of Scotland? You have a presumptive right there but you have to clear off if the landowner asks you to.
With FedEx and UPS, there's an assumption of permission. You have a package to deliver to me, therefore they can walk up to my front door to deliver it. You cannot, however, walk around my property taking photos of my house or walk into my backyard. Tax appraisers work for the government and thus get a bit more leeway than your normal person. And utility workers can go on your property for purpose of servicing your (or someone else's) utility service. This is typically on the front portion of your front yard (which is technically not yours, but owned by the local government specifically for utility purposes). My house, however, has utility poles in my backyard and we've more than once seen utility workers walk down our driveway and behind our garage to get up the poles.
So, yes, there are exceptions, but that doesn't mean that Joe Random Individual can walk up my driveway to take photos of my backyard.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
No.
I can point you specifically to 130 IAC 4-1-5 in the Indiana Code. The New York Port Authority has something similar that reaches farther. Maryland does. Ohio. I'd list other states but it has been a while since I traveled around the US for photography.
Here is picture of the signs you'll find around New York, courtesy of the Port Authority. I know from first hand experience that it is enforced.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
When I was flying it was 500 ft. AGL in non-populated areas (a lone ranch house in the country). It was 1000 ft. AGL over populated areas (cities/suburbs) or large gatherings of people.
I think air shows have specific waivers for the large gatherings of people -- and as we've seen in the past, it can be really bad when something goes wrong.
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
FAA regs state 500 ft separation in rural areas, 1000 ft in residential or urban areas. In Class G airspace you can fly as low as you like to the ground (if your are foolish), but cannot come with 500 ft of a structure. So if these folks lived in the country someone could fly over their property at 500 ft and take pictures to their hearts content.
Funny thing is, if they had just kept quiet this would be a non issue. How many people would be going onto google maps and looking at their specific spot on the planet. Now that they have raised a stink, people from all around the globe will consider visiting the famous "privacy" home. Their actions are like someone jumping up and down saying "Don't look at me, don;t look at me".
Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
.
According to local law, customs and traditions.
The Google logo on your cap isn't worth s--t when you intrude on a mosque in Mecca or Medina - or the property of a cattleman in Texas.
His double-barreled shotgun will teach you some manners.
Streisand effect.
Yes but if they succeed then Google will remove the offending images and we will only be able to see their house as it appears from the public street, which is the way things should be.
If Google had their van drive all the way up my drive, take pictures of my house and garden from it, and then post those pictures on a billion user api based internet map interface, I'd be pretty pissed off too.
Maybe a lot of Slashdotters are from suburbia, and don't fully understand what some rural houses are like. Some people build their house at some remove from the highway, with a _long_ drive connecting it to the public road. 50m+. They do this, ironically in this case, because they want some privacy and.or piece and quiet. This drive is theirs, and they have to pay themselves for keeping it graveled or tarmaced, at considerable cost. The difference in road surface is consequently immediately obvious. You know it's not a public highway.
Typically it won't have a gate where it meets the road, unless farmers are driving cattle down the road regularly. Some people would consider such a gate unwelcoming.(Yes, a desire for privacy does not rule out being amiable). But it is private property. I've seen this type of drive lined for tens of meters with magnificent arrays of trees or quite stunning blooms. Some can be slightly overgrown, with bushes bulging out at both sides. Since the public roads have their bushes trimmed, that's another distinguishing sign.
These are the rules where I come from. I'm sure various regions have their own. In short, anyone from a rural area knows when a road is someone's driveway, and when it is a public road. However, I'd suspect that to the young, single 00's suburbanites driving the google vans, one dirt track in the wilderness looks much the same as another. But that isn't really an excuse not to take down the photographs.
May the Maths Be with you!
Not enough in California, USA. Here, "private road" means "this road is not government owned", and that is it. That way, you know whether or not particular laws (like the CA Vehicle Code) apply. I lived on such a road a one point. If you want to legally prevent people from entering, you must have a barrier or a "no trespassing" sign.