Google Street View Raises Privacy Concerns 520
Pcol writes "The New York Times is running a story about a woman who says her cat is clearly visible through the living room window of her second-floor apartment using Street View and that she has contacted Google asking that the photo be removed. 'The issue that I have ultimately is about where you draw the line between taking public photos and zooming in on people's lives,' Ms. Kalin-Casey said in an interview. 'The next step might be seeing books on my shelf. If the government was doing this, people would be outraged.' Wired has started a contest on the most interesting photos found using the new Google Tool that now includes sunbathing coeds, alleged drug deals, and the google van itself. 'I think that this product illustrates a tension between our First Amendment right to document public spaces around us, and the privacy interests people have as they go about their day,' says Kevin Bankston, a staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation."
Old news... (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, copyright law states (IANAL) that you can take pictures of people in their homes from the street. Only no zooming, and with (I think) a 55mm lens at best. Look up the case law. The only think I think that may be challenged in court is if high res photos at 55mm constitutes some kind of new zoom...
Personally (Score:5, Interesting)
We were dying laughing for nearly 10 minutes thinking about a big google van driving through the slums and taking panoramic photos.
Christ we are geeks.
Invasion of your given away privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
I wish there could be like true blue public forum based discussions on these matters so people can get a true perspective of reality before wanting their 15 minutes of fame. Would I be mad if Google passed me by on the street while I was scratching my crotch... No. Would I be upset if they filmed my cat? No. Home? No. Would I be mad if it was constant (so called antiterrorism foobar cams)... Yes.
Re:not just her cat (Score:4, Interesting)
"Coeds"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Offtopic, I know, but "sunbathing coeds"? As in "sunbathing students of both genders" or as in "sunbathing women"? Why do we refer to women like they're anomalies at academic institutions?
At my school, we have something like 60% women... should we call men "co-eds"?
Go ahead, mod me down as offtopic, but this kind of thing irks me.
Re:not just her cat (Score:3, Interesting)
I found Street View to be useful. I live in New Jersey suburbs, close enough to go to NYC on occassion, but I don't live or work there. It gets awfully confusing trying to find my way through there. Map websites helped with this. Hybrid view in Googlemaps helped more since now I can distinguish areas by large patches of color in a top-down view.
Now with Street View, I know exactly what each corner looks like so I'll be able to recognize that turn when it comes up.
This is how Street View is meant to be used, and it has succeeded in being useful to me. I'm just saying, though this lady's cat has been seen in a window, the public now has gained a useful tool in navigating the streets.
Which outweighs the other? I don't know. I understand her position. I just know that I appreciate the added utility and I would be saddened to lose it. I would love it if the van could come through my neighborhood and outlying areas as well.
Simple solution... (Score:2, Interesting)
Google should allow people the option to send in an alternate photo. Give people the information on where to stand and what kinds of camera you can use, and then, if approved, pay something like $100 a photo. Maybe have an approval process first for whether the photo is inappropriate or not, and other ways to keep people from scamming the system.
That way, people can regain their privacy, and make a hundred bucks, and Google keeps their reputation, and doesn't pay much more than they would sending someone out to retake the photo.
Re:No it isn't. (Score:5, Interesting)
So not having your blinds wide open is "living out of a dungeon" then? Blinds have a variety of settings, and most of them allow privacy. Even some of the settings that let light in the windows protect privacy.
But the real question is: what is the hysteria about? I understand the preference for privacy, but I don't understand the desperate, hysterical need for it. What's the tragedy when a little privacy is lost? (Normally, in matters where privacy is more valued, people tend to be discrete.)
It's not like Google is trying to force anyone to do anything. They aren't trying to steal anything from anyone. No extortion. No blackmail. No motives at all really, except to sell ads by helping people avoid getting lost.
So what should I be scared of? There's some great danger lurking out there that you folks seem to know about, but I don't. I'm ignorant of the horrible peril I'm supposedly in. Please tell me.
Re:Overreaction? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:"Coeds"? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What I would do... (Score:5, Interesting)
You know that brings up an interesting thought. What if someone hangs a 2A0 goatse picture on their wall, or is sitting in the living room jacking off to girls gone wild (thinking about the co-ed discussion further back). Google comes along and shoots it in the street view. So now we can zoom in and see this. Where does this fall?
1) Invasion of privacy
2) Distribution of pr0n by google
3) Public obscenity by the person who's house it is?
(/. caveat:- If you don't like the examples please insert your own, my point is about the various ways of looking at the implications of the situation)
Re:No it isn't. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Cue "In Soviet Russia" jokes. (Score:1, Interesting)
Working for "The Man", it is defintely like that. Eventually it will get to the point where we are treated like children and have to ask permission to go take a dump !