August 1, 2008
Street View needs to watch the signs
Of all the schemes Google has dreamt up over the years, Street View has got to be one of the most controversial.
For those not familiar with the idea, Google are taking photos of every street in pretty much the whole world, and integrating it with Google Maps. Naturally, several privacy groups are up in arms at the idea, even though Google have agreed to blur faces and remove people if they request it.
But blurring isn’t Google’s only problem. In what may become a test case, a couple in Pennsylvania are suing Google for publishing pictures of their house, as it is on a private road.
In a statement to court, Google said complete privacy does not exist, but have since said that their remarks have been taken out of context. Google clarified this to me in the following statement:
“There’s been some misinterpretation concerning our response to the Street View suit… It should not be interpreted as a blanket statement on our views towards privacy. To be clear, Google respects an individual’s right to privacy. We have privacy protections built into all of our products. For example, we blur faces in Street View and we offer easy-to-use removal tools so users can decide for themselves whether or not they want a given image to appear in Street View. It is unfortunate the parties involved opted to pursue litigation instead of making use of these tools.”
This problem will be far greater for Street View in the UK due to the very high number of private roads. There are around 40,000 in the UK, according to Private Roads Services. Although it’s hard to quantify the number of public roads in the UK, I estimate there are around 100,000 streets in London (according to a quick calculation counting the entries in the London street atlas).
Google said its policy was to not photograph private roads, and that its drivers were trained to look out for them. Which I think means not driving past a sign saying “private road”. But a spokesman admitted that mistakes have been made, and they would be more careful in future. “We made the error of photographing the approach road to a military base in the US,” said the spokesman. “We learnt from that.”
Tags: google, ICO, privacy, streetview
Who are Google?
Posted by: philip bale | August 3rd, 2008 at 9:49 am | Report this commentAre they investigative journalists on a holy quest to catalogue the human race - To what end?
If it is merely to entertain the masses, no doubt I will enjoy using this facility like millions of others. I will also probably object to my house being examined by complete strangers in minute detail and possibly punch a specially trained ‘Google man’ if he shoves a camera in my face.
However, Mr Google should be careful. Colombian drug barons, Yakuza, Russian mafia, etc. are notoriously shy. Then again the odd hermit with a shotgun (brewing moonshine) can also be a challenge. Don’t forget those tribes whom think that you are stealing their soul when you take a snap. Are Mr Google’s specially trained staff issued with the equipment to deal with a poison dart in the neck I wonder? They should get danger money.
How on earth (excuse pun) is anyone, let alone google, supposed to know whether a road is private or not? Is no one allowed to set foot on a private road without permission? And where is it defined what one is legally permitted to do on a private road?
Posted by: James Forrester | August 3rd, 2008 at 10:01 am | Report this commentWhat about rights of way - do similar restrictions apply?
What a legal muddle. No change there then.
It shouldn’t be up to the habitants of private roads to remove their own houses. Google generally seems not to be concerned about the concept of individual ownership, whether it is your house, the information on the websites you visit, or book copyrights in it’s google book service. I suggest they be taken down a peg or two before we find that in fact Google owns the copyright to how your own house looks.
Posted by: Dominic Cohen | August 3rd, 2008 at 11:41 am | Report this commentSo rich people who live on private roads are allowed their privacy - but the poor are not entitled to it? Charming
Posted by: R Simpson | August 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 pm | Report this commentDominic
Please quit shoving your saliva covered silver spoon in our faces and accept free speech.
<3
Posted by: James M | August 3rd, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Report this commentActually, many of the private roads in the UK are nothing to do with wealth, but are in impoverished areas.
This article from the Guardian in 2003 explains why:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/oct/22/guardiansocietysupplement5
However, there are of course many private roads that have wealthy residents, and therefore have the means to act on these kinds of issues. Whether or not they have the inclination remains to be seen, and very much depends on Google sticking to their promise of not photographing private roads.
Posted by: Rob Minto | August 3rd, 2008 at 2:09 pm | Report this commentThe truth is that I can drive anytime I want where Google drivers have driven and take a picture of your house and post it anywhere I want,as long as I’m not trespassing that is.
So what’s the big deal, there are now probably about 5 million + homes on Google street view, do they feel that there house is that much more important?
How self centered. Too bad most of them won’t realize that the world doesn’t revolve around them until day they die, and even then…
I think Google has invested a huge amount of money in something that probably will never be done by anyone else. It can become a great tool someday, especially for serial killers, hahahah.
Posted by: Vince | August 3rd, 2008 at 8:00 pm | Report this commentFirst of all, “Google are taking photos of every street in pretty much the whole world” is an exaggeration at this point and will probably never happen. I doubt that *every* street in the UK will be photographed. In fact, it’s likely most of the small towns will have no Street View. The vast majority of the U.S. hasn’t been photographed yet, and there are cities in the U.S., France and Italy for which only a few roads have been photographed.
Since Google has begun employing technology to blur faces and license plates, as a virtual tourist, I find it a less interesting tool to use, because that same technology has degraded the quality of the pictures.
As to whether burglaries will increase as a direct result of Street View, I guess that remains to be seen. If someone wants to case your home to burgle, they can accomplish that without Street View, just by driving by and taking a photo.
Google is not the only service providing street view images; they simply have the most imagery available. The other companies have much sharper pictures and don’t bother to blur anything. While those companies are smaller, it proves that if Google doesn’t do it, someone else will … eventually.
Posted by: Cramer | August 4th, 2008 at 4:26 pm | Report this comment