Slashdot Mirror


Google Loses Street View Suit, Forced To Pay $1

Translation Error writes "Two and a half years ago, the Borings sued Google for invading their privacy by driving onto their private driveway and taking pictures of their house to display on Google Street View. Now, the case has finally come to a close with the judge ruling in favor of the Borings and awarding them the princely sum of $1. While the judge found the Borings to be in the right, she awarded them only nominal damages, as the fact that they had already made images of their home available on a real estate site and didn't bother to seal the lawsuit to minimize publicity indicated the Borings neither valued their privacy nor had it been affected in any great way by Google's actions."

6 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Great by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Since the judge found for the plaintiff, you would have to assume each paid their own. If the Boring's lawyer worked on a contingency, that would land him around $0.33 cold hard cash, to spend as he would like.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  2. Re:A $! verdict? by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope they enjoy their $1.
    If I were in charge at Google, I would go in person to deliver then an enormous $1 cheque.

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
  3. Re:A $! verdict? by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Funny

    And pull up in a Google Street View van?

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  4. Precedent by Caerdwyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But since American law operates as much upon precedent as statute, this has significance.

    Google (and others) now know it's not okay to come on to private property for photogathering without permission, and can't play dumb next time. Google wasn't trespassing "innocently" or "by mistake"; they were engaged in commercial activity and did what they did intentionally. The judge in the decision also laid out the circumstances under which the trespass would have higher costs. If Google does this to someone who DOES value their privacy, the cost would be higher, and if Google is caught doing this repeatedly then they are sooner or later going to run into a "You don't learn, do ya, boy?" judge. Remember also that trespassing is a criminal charge, and in many places the property owner could call the police or even make a citizen's arrest on the van with the funny thing on top.

    I'd be interested in seeing how Google would react if someone drove into their parking lot, hauled out a camera and started photographing their campus, their employees and their employees' cars, then claimed they weren't doing anything that Google wasn't themselves doing. I'm going to guess the answer would involve the Mountain View police and potentially DHS, (given that it's a high-value economic target to anti-capitalists).

    --
    Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
    1. Re:Precedent by macshit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "I'd be interested in seeing how Google would react if someone drove into their parking lot, hauled out a camera and started photographing their campus"

      What? you mean like this... http://chrisonstad.blogspot.com/2007/02/my-trip-to-google-with-photos.html

      More: http://www.bing.com/search?q=my+photos+of+google+campus

      haha! you used bing!

      Actually, I'm curious: why did you use bing? Plugging your bing search into google yields much better results -- the google search actually turns up mostly photos of google campuses (with your first link as the first hit!), whereas the bing results seem to all be just photos of various college campuses that happen to be hosted on google sites....

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion