Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
chengrob

Google earth violates privacy

Recommended Posts

Sounds like a legitimate lawsuit to me. It is not a public way, it is a "private" road on private property.

 

Not that I thimk they should be awarded any money, but certainly the images should be destroyed and not included in Google Maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That lawsuit doesn't look dumb to me. The picture looks right into their backyard and pool area. They should be able to sit by the pool without having to worry about their picture being taken.

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't think that google would fight them on this, they did go onto private property and take photos, Makes you wonder if they asked google first to remove it before the suit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question I have is "When" were the photos taken?

 

They purchased the property in 2006, were these the real estate sales photos?

 

If they are, I see no basis for a lawsuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point that I was trying to make is that if they want privacy having a lawsuit broadcast across the internet probably has interrupted their privacy a lot more than Google did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it should be thrown out of court, the city zoning departments use the same images.

 

 

its not fact but i believe they moved there only to sue google ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does the local zoning dept put it on the internet on a public search engine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, they do it here in pontiac

 

edit: its not really local, its state wide

Edited by duanester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they do it here for tax purposes, but you have to know the address, the name on the deed, and year of sale in order to access it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many events that have highlighted the issues of privacy. Rob, you do have a good point that in filing the lawsuit hurt these people's privacy more than having the picture on the Internet. Does the end justify the means?

 

This is a good article about Privacy vs. Surveillance.

 

The Deputy Director of National Intelligence Does Not Understand Key Concepts Of Privacy

 

-Rebecca Herold, November 12, 2007

 

I found a report yesterday, "Intelligence deputy to America: Rethink privacy" quite interesting. The impact on privacy...the actual definition, not the definition Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence, thinks it should be...would not only be a huge step backward for the country, but it would also increase the threats to personally identifiable information (PII) exponentially.

 

To put it in a nutshell, Kerr is pushing to allow the government to eavesdrop on all types of electronic communications and phone calls without first obtaining court permission; basically at will. All in the name of "intelligence gathering" and preventing terrorism. All they have to do to do this monitoring, under the changes made in a rush last year to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is to "reasonably believe" one of the participants in the communication is located outside the U.S. However, recent history has shown that this is a very wide net cast into the digital ocean that captures basically all that happen to be swimming in the waters.

 

Kerr doesn't get privacy. Kerr doesn't understand what privacy means to most people throughout the world. Kerr doesn't get the concerns people have about privacy.

 

More......

 

http://www.realtime-itcompliance.com/gover..._of_nationa.htm

This is a blog about it. The comments are rather interesting.

 

Schneier on Security: Redefining Privacy

 

-Bruce Schneier, November 14, 2007

 

This kind of thinking can do enormous damage to a free society:

 

As Congress debates new rules for government eavesdropping, a top intelligence official says it is time that people in the United States change their definition of privacy.

 

Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguard people's private communications and financial information.

 

[...]

 

"Our job now is to engage in a productive debate, which focuses on privacy as a component of appropriate levels of security and public safety," Kerr said. "I think all of us have to really take stock of what we already are willing to give up, in terms of anonymity, but [also] what safeguards we want in place to be sure that giving that doesn't empty our bank account or do something equally bad elsewhere."

 

Anonymity, privacy, and security are intertwined; you can't just separate them out like that. And privacy isn't opposed to security; privacy is part of security. And the value of privacy in a free society is enormous.

 

More......

 

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007...ining_priv.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't frivolous.

 

It is private property, on a private road.

 

They had no business being on the property in the first place, that is trespassing, and they certainly don't have any business posting images of that private property the got illegally on the internet without the owners consent.

 

Taking pictures from a "public road" of a piece of property is a lot different from trespassing on private property to get the images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are "on your property" taking pictures of your backyard, you probably could.

 

If they are driving by and take shots of the front of your house, nope you can't.

 

I don't understand what happened to people.

 

I don't understand why since the PC that the expectation of privacy no longer seems to exist, because people just don't care. Our laws haven't changed, the same expectation of privacy exists.

 

Would you say something if they entered your house and started snapping pictures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you say something if they entered your house and started snapping pictures?

 

 

what ever you do in your house is private, i see where you are getting bruce but nothing is private outside those boundaries, nothing, you can post as many signs as you wish, ups, happy's pizza, the utility meter readers, the landscapers, news helicopters will see the house.

 

now private road means don't drive threw here, thats all it means

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here in michigan there are many of these roads, i mean thousands, those signs let drivers know thats its not a public road due to the curves, hills, and cross roads, its its easy to think someones driveway is a public road.

 

it being private is unlikely, i put up a fence on my front lawn to keep people off of it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the private drive is part of their property. just because it's their driveway does not mean it's okay to enter without permission. google clearly crossed the line on this. they have no business entering private property without permission. in texas it could easily get you shot at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...