Google Sued For Invasion Of Privacy With Street View

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It didn’t take long for Google to be sued by people not happy with Street View. We’ll have to keep an eye on this case because it will definitely be interesting to see how this one shakes out.

Google Street View was expanded to Pittsburgh in October. The Borings found that their home was clearly visible on the map, causing them "mental suffering" and diluting their home value, according to the suit. They are seeking more than $25,000 in damages and asking that the images of their home be taken off the site and destroyed.
Click to expand...
 
Remove them from our gene pool... please!

Were the "Borings" performing lewd acts of beastiality on their lawn or something? Oh no.. wait.. that would mean they'd have to change their last name to "Interestings." =/
 
Are you saying that lewd acts of bestiality is interesting?
 
Being a bestiality freak is more interesting than being a litigious cocksucker :)
 
I want to sue the Borings for $500,000 for "mental suffering" caused by the mindblowing inaneness of claiming it hurt their home value.

WOOHOO! HIT THE JACKPOT!
 
Even without reading the pleadings, I can confidently say the suit stands no chance of success. Mental suffering because their house can be seen on the internet? Right...

Despite public belief to the contrary, most courts are pretty stingy with when they will award mental suffering (or emotional distress). This one doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell. The best the Borings could hope for is an injunction requiring Google to blackout their house (and it would be a long shot to get that).
 
Sounds like the Borings decided to spice up there lives with a bit of Gold Digging to me. I think they should have to pay a fine for filing such a ludicrous lawsuit.
 
Somone should clean the gene pool and start with these folks.
 
Allegheny County has a picture of every house in the county on the county website. This is for tax purposes, or something.

I love how they pointed out in the article how this is bringing even more attention to the Borings. What a name.
 
Stupid morons. Heck, my home is on the Internet via my county assessor. I'll bet theirs is too. Please remove these people's reproductive organs!
 
Ha, the Google Streetview car caught me in the middle of my front yard watering my flowers last summer in my bathing suit. Maybe I can sue for something too.:rolleyes:

If they live on a private road, why did they not have a gate at the end of the private road to keep the riffraff out?

Don
 
Correct me if i'm wrong but isn't the view of the outside of your house publicly accessible? I could understand if it was a snapshot of Mr. Boring in the shower but just the outside of a house? Does that mean they will sue me for driving past and looking at thier house?
 
I think i'm going to sue this couple for "Boring" me so damn much with their BS........ *LOL*
 
What I find funny is most of you tards are against the government spying on you but love google tools like this. Now who are the real tools?
 
The real tools are the ones who think they're so elite and above it all that they keep voting the people into positions that actually do take away our freedoms and they don't even have enough smarts to realize it. Like for instance, what type lightbulbs you can use in your house, what is a "reasonable" firearm and who should have them, what snacks your kid is allowed to eat at school, the method you use to talk on your cellphone in the car, whether or not you are allowed to pump your own gas.. etc, etc, etc. Next up on the agenda is how many carbon emissions you are allowed to emit per year and how much energy your home can use. And of course you'll be taxed exponentially for using more. Next after that is the government controlling the temperature of your home and what type vehicle you can drive.
 
Damn, I just looked at the pictures a little closer, and realized they caught my underaged daughter sitting in the neighbors front steps.

I'll sue, sue them into the "Dial UP BBS Days."

AKA the stone age.

If anyone wants to veiw the pics, just IM me.;)

Don
 
Monkeypillow said:
It is my understanding that if you are in public, photography is fair game.

Maybe I'm wrong?
Click to expand...
You're wrong, though it may depend on the state. Most (if not all) of the laws I've seen regarding pictures of individuals will say something about having permission to use their likeness and certainly if it depicts the person in an embarrassing act/fashion. The latter of which is completely subjective. But keep in mind, most of this is one massive gray area anyway, and is almost always covered under civil courts not criminal. (Though, irrefutably, all paparazzi should be hung from billboards by their testicles until death.)

Hypothetical situation, lets say I'm out drinking and get plastered, then I take a piss in some wide-open parking lot. Then you happen by, and being the hypothetical sick little monkey you are, take a shot of me (and me), promptly throwing it on the 'net. You'd better believe a lawyer will be painting a bulls-eye on you.

But these people are definitely going overboard...

The only way I see them having a chance with an Invasion of Privacy is:
1. They are on a secluded street marked private and/or gated (Check)
2. They have obvious obstructions on their property to impede visibility of the property but was circumvented by the photographer (doesn't look like either is true)
3. They have asked for the images to be removed and were told to F-off (EPIC FAIL)

Going strait to litigation when they had simpler, more direct, and much more discreet methods of having the images removed is going to get it tossed, assuming Google doesn't go medieval on them like The Smoking Gun did. But they're just assholes anyway.
 
^So how do paparazzi get away with it when they take embarrassing photos of celebrities and the like? Because of Libel laws?
 
it is perfectly legal to have an image of a home if taken from the street, or something like that, i could freely walk down the street take a picture of said street and if their house is in it, tough shit they cant do anything about it.
 
for people if you can clearly see their face and make out who they are, then you need permission, otherwise if you can not clearly discern who the person is, the picture is legal.

as for celebrities, not sure, i figure once they become famous, they give up most of their rights in return for overly paid paychecks for shitty performances :d
 
I just don't get this. OH NOES, THEY TOOK PICTURES FROM THE STREET!

Anyone could do this and publish the pictures. News reporters do it all the time..."Live from the scene, look there's the neighborhood behind me." It's not invasion of privacy because if someone can see it from the street, IT'S NOT PRIVATE!
 
MrGuvernment said:
for people if you can clearly see their face and make out who they are, then you need permission, otherwise if you can not clearly discern who the person is, the picture is legal.
Click to expand...

If they're out in public, they're fair game. If I take a picture of you walking down the street and publish it, you can't do a thing. You put yourself in public view, I shouldn't have to ask permission of everyone in a park if I can take a picture of the park.
 
The street view is really cool actually. I hope they don't take it down :)
 
So, the value of their house is reduced by people seeing it? Must be a real dump...
 
I haven't seen the pic, but I doubt a pic of the BORINGS house is more interesting than that girl from San Fransico that got caught by the GOOGLE street team reaching over to the passenger seat in her pickup truck while her pants rode down enough to see her thong underwear, and she wasn't a pig.. :)

That story came out last summer I believe..
 
PopeKevinI said:
If they're out in public, they're fair game. If I take a picture of you walking down the street and publish it, you can't do a thing. You put yourself in public view, I shouldn't have to ask permission of everyone in a park if I can take a picture of the park.
Click to expand...

could be if you use the image for profit then you need permission.. ? or it is just straight out, your i public your fair game... why celeb's cant do jack...
 
MrGuvernment said:
could be if you use the image for profit then you need permission.. ? or it is just straight out, your i public your fair game... why celeb's cant do jack...
Click to expand...

I did some reading on this earlier, it's a state-by-state thing. Here in Texas, I got the impression that pretty much any photo taken in public is protected by the first amendment. When you go out into the world, you are subjecting yourself to being seen by anyone who happens to pass by. It stands to reason that you give up any sense of privacy if you do something that a random passerby can see.
 
The edit button seems to be gone, so I'll just add to my previous post: I did notice that nearly all sites on the matter said that it's good practice to get a waiver from everyone in a picture before using it for profit (celebrities being the exception). Not so much that you need one in most places, it just avoids nasty lawsuits if the people involved know they've signed a form giving you permission to do whatever you please with the picture.
 
Google could be sued if they sold the photo for a profit, ie making money off of someone else's property. But just having it available on the internet is ridiculous. StreetView is no different that viewing a house from the top via satellite.
 
If I recall correctly a photo taken with a satellite from orbit, lies well outside of the boundaries to which their state laws can reach. :-P

Google should counter sue the fuck out of them for intentionally bringing false litigation, then send them a letter simply with the following: "GG"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top