I didn't put her name on the website. Our site has the ability for users to caption photographs. One of the users of our site captioned that one. Our policy is to leave captions that are not profane, not libelous, and accurately describe some part of the frame. This information is already available elsewhere -- go to Google and search for "Streisand and Malibu".
With so much data, there is a "relevance" problem in finding what you want on our web site. The captioning system is a valuable way for users of our web site to exchange what they know about the photographs. The identification of her estate is of interest to the public because she has made it newsworthy -- for example, as recently as a week ago she lost a lawsuit with a neighbor over the height of their house.
I don't disagree with her professed politics. The quote about her leaving the country was made jokingly. I really have no malice torwards Ms. Streisand and don't understand why she has singled me out for this treatment. It is, however, a little difficult at times to suppress the natural anger you develop towards someone when they sue you.
Actually, the relevent precedent when you're looking at the fourth amendment is California v. Ciraolo, 476 US 207 (1986).
The Supreme Court in that case, per Chief Justice Burger, held that warrantless aerial observation of fenced-in backyard within curtilage of home was not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
"In an age where private and commercial flight in the public airways is routine, it is unreasonable for respondent to expect that his marijuana plants were constitutionally protected from being observed with the naked eye from an altitude of 1,000 feet. The Fourth Amendment simply does not require the police traveling in the public airways at this altitude to obtain a warrant in order to observe what is visible to the naked eye."
Barbra's house underlies the Federal Airway (V299) between Ventura and LAX. It is basically located on an aircraft-freeway in a high-traffic area. It would be hard to imagine any place with a lower expectation of privacy from air traffic.
Slashdot Mirror
With so much data, there is a "relevance" problem in finding what you want on our web site. The captioning system is a valuable way for users of our web site to exchange what they know about the photographs. The identification of her estate is of interest to the public because she has made it newsworthy -- for example, as recently as a week ago she lost a lawsuit with a neighbor over the height of their house.
I don't disagree with her professed politics. The quote about her leaving the country was made jokingly. I really have no malice torwards Ms. Streisand and don't understand why she has singled me out for this treatment. It is, however, a little difficult at times to suppress the natural anger you develop towards someone when they sue you.
I do. You can find it on www.solarwarrior.com.
Actually, the relevent precedent when you're looking at the fourth amendment is California v. Ciraolo, 476 US 207 (1986).
The Supreme Court in that case, per Chief Justice Burger, held that warrantless aerial observation of fenced-in backyard within curtilage of home was not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
"In an age where private and commercial flight in the public airways is routine, it is unreasonable for respondent to expect that his marijuana plants were constitutionally protected from being observed with the naked eye from an altitude of 1,000 feet. The Fourth Amendment simply does not require the police traveling in the public airways at this altitude to obtain a warrant in order to observe what is visible to the naked eye."
Barbra's house underlies the Federal Airway (V299) between Ventura and LAX. It is basically located on an aircraft-freeway in a high-traffic area. It would be hard to imagine any place with a lower expectation of privacy from air traffic.
Kenneth Adelman (Defendant)