Comments on: Boring couple sue Google for invasion of privacy over Street View

By: Sammy Hoscheid

Sammy Hoscheid — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 05:46:51 +0000

Thanks for the info, but I can’t import to the server and the message like this

By: que nha ta

que nha ta — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:41:16 +0000

def. of invasion of privacy: is that every person reserves the right to videotape, taking pictures or herhalf use google earth device to record a bird or any type of objects that is okay. If sone ome intent to vandalize soneone’s property and intent to set videocamera from their window to see what victim have to say and display on webs to intimadte and harass, this is obsolutly invasion of privacy rights act

By: Roger Wilson

Roger Wilson — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:15:02 +0000

What nobody seems to understand is that the government has technology far beyond this view , yea , it’s cool to look at , almost mesmerizing , and that’s what our government depends on , keeping you distracted from any oversight of their activities , all your privacy is gone and all of your rights are gone , and all of our primitive little minds are occupied , and know this , while you’re sitting at your keyboard with bloodshot eyes 3 o’clock in the morning driving mindless views in google maps , a half a world away , young men are dying in a stupid war because you were to distracted to notice. Oh ,and don’t forget to tell your grand kids that you’re sorry the shape we left the planet in , seeing as there’s no fish , clean air or water left , and we’re also sorry about the missing ozone layer , Big Brother told us to relax , he’d keep his EYE on everything.

By: Victor

Victor — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 12:38:33 +0000

Hi, there and hello to space.

My point of view is ..definetly, all Google Street Views should not be allowed.

What I feel about it:
- It damages tourism.

- It may help to criminals to organise their bank robbery.

- There is a probability that it can be invasion to privacy.

..another surprising fact are Bing maps..
For me unbelievable.. You can see what is behind a bank….

By: Lorraine

Lorraine — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 22:45:31 +0000

Google have not blurred my license plate

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:13:52 +0000

“vehicle with readable plates”

I call Shenanigans.
Google has a program that scans all images for things shaped like license plates and automatically blurs them – rendering any plates unreadable.

By: AreUStupid

AreUStupid — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:50:22 +0000

I can’t believe the audacity of Google and the fools who commented on their behalf. Many of you who have made remarks regarding the condition of the Borings’ home and property are missing the point. The point is no one has the right to make money off of you without your consent.

We live in a private subdivision whose streets are not maintained by the county. I was absolutely livid when I saw my OPEN garage and vehicle with readable plates (it only takes a few clicks to make it out) or the school bus our children ride with the number brandished so boldly. I have been appalled at the blatant disregard for the law Google has taken in some of these instances. If we are to live by the laws set in place, why aren’t conglomerates made to do so as well?

Shameful!! Very shameful to the many of you who condone such unethical behavior and who degrade those working people who deserve the same protection you do!

I guess morality means nothing to you people.

By: Steve Johnson

Steve Johnson — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:57:15 +0000

Invasion of privacy most definitely can be done even when standing on “public” property (i.e. the street).

People are entitled to what is called a “reasonable expectation of privacy” under certain circumstances. This has been established by cases on the subject. One of the times they are entitled to it is if they are inside their own home. That means if you take a picture of them through the window, or potentially even through an open door, then you are indeed invading their privacy.

I know this because I was recently involved in such a case. The house in question was set back somewhere around 150 feet from the street and the neighbor across the street, using a zoom lens, took pictures of the property across the street. This was ruled an invasion of privacy and the plaintiff prevaled, with monetary damages.

In this case where it is a private street I believe the test for privacy should indeed be what a normal person (sans any telescope, zoom lense, special audio amplifier etc) can see or hear from a public place.

I think they are suing for far too little. I also agree that there is no need for the aerial photos and that they could, indeed be used at least in part to plan a break in.

Google counters with the option to remove the pictures, however, the infraction of the law took place the instant the picture/video was taken. Offering to remove it later does not remedy the situation. What they should have done to be legal was to get the permission of the landowner to photograph their property.

I wonder how many people would agree to this and how many would turn it down. I know that I would tell google to take a hike and stay out of/off of my property.

Steve

By: Will

Will — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:17:50 +0000

It’s not the fact that I object to the street view photos although I do see them as an invasion of privacy, It is the aerial views which have all four sides of my home that you can actually zoom in on. This invites thieves and burglars to view these maps and plan an attack on my home. I am really surprised that with all the homeland security hooplah that this would be legal at all. Why do people need to see in my side and back yards? I for one hope this turn into a large class action lawsuit to stop this kind of Big Brother technology! What’s next the Cameras that can see through walls? Where are those ambulance chasing lawyers now? Oh yeah, their suing drug companies.

By: Tyrone

Tyrone — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:20:45 +0000

That whole private/public road thing is what’s gonna be played out in court. If it is true, that the car was on private property, and not a city street – then yeah, Google’s in a bit of trouble.
You can call it firvolous if you want, but if you pay more for privacy, you DESERVE it, in my view.
Now, if the picutre was taken from a public street, then yeah, the Borings can shove it, which is what any competent judge would politely tell them.