Google Declares: 'Complete Privacy Does Not Exist'
Total privacy may be a thing of the past -- at least, that is Google's assertion in a heated fight over personal privacy rights.
Let me get you up to speed: A Pittsburgh couple is suing Google over its Google Maps Street View service. The couple says the online images of their home shown on the site caused them "mental suffering" and dropped their property value. The drop in value, the couple argues, is because a house that can be viewed on Google Street Views is less private and therefore less desirable.
And that's where things get interesting.
Defining Privacy
Google's response to the couple, posted in its entirety by the Smoking Gun, is you can't expect to have absolute privacy in this day and age.
"Today's satellite-image technology means that even in today's desert, complete privacy does not exist," Google argued in court paperwork.
Google goes on to explain that anyone could see the same view of the home while walking down the street. The lawyers also question why the couple didn't just ask to have the photos removed -- an option plainly offered on Street View -- rather than immediately seeking money...and lots of it. The suit calls for $25,000 in damages.
Breaking Down the Case
So who's in the wrong here? Google's close-up imaging technology has certainly come under fire before. Right off the bat, privacy advocates complained about people being identifiable within the shots. They said it could expose someone in an embarrassing situation -- on vacation in a skimpy swimsuit, for example, or leaving a strip club.
After introducing an optional face blurring feature, Google eventually caved and decided to blur out all faces automatically. In this Pittsburgh lawsuit, though, we're not even talking about faces -- we're just talking about the outside of a house. And that's why it strikes me as little more than a case of someone trying to find an easy payday.
The Final Word
I mean, give me a break. Having exterior shots of their home online caused this couple mental suffering? The outside views -- ones that were already available elsewhere on the Internet, as Google pointed out -- caused their property value to drop?
There may be something to the idea of not showing faces in Street View images, and Google has responded dutifully to those concerns. There's a big difference, however, between showing someone's face and showing the outside of his house. While I'm all for privacy, in this instance, I've gotta side with the G-team. This case is just plain silliness -- no matter how you view it.
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
this is america. you can sue if someone does not look at you right way. Hopefully the couple loses because they are just cheap bastards trying to obtain money any way they can.
When to really start worrying is when some equally moronic judge finds in favor of an idiot plaintiff like this.
It'll happen, too. Idiot judges without a lick of common sense who stretch the laws beyond the breaking point are apparently a dime a dozen these days. You probably can't even say that about judges; so sue me, Your Honor. I'd love to see you explain why you think I was talking about you in particular.