Google Street View Creates Problems in Japan

[piper5177]

[citation][nom]alaskan_handyman[/nom]I think google should first fix the accuracy of their maps before getting too deep into reshooting street level photographs. Here in Homer Alaska they have streets showing on the maps where there are none, the average address is more than a block off and the hybrid satellite imagery does not line up with the map data.[/citation]


Horrible examples from your link. All of those arrests were not for taking photos at a school. Nice way to substantiate your claim. There is a BIG difference between hiding a camera in a locker room and taking photos of children at a public school. And YES you CAN sit in your car with a zoom lens and take pictures of people through their window. PIs do it all of the time to prove fraud. It is the responsibility of the person in the home to close the drapes. If they ask you not to take pictures repeatedly and you continue to do it then it is harassment and has nothing to do with taking photos. I hate people who make an argument they know nothing about and then post a BS link which supposedly backs up their viewpoint. I am a photographer and I know what I can legally shoot and what I can't.

 

[Startingline13]

Oh btw, my siding is different than it was three months ago. It is not grey. Didn't want to confuse the ninjas/robbers.

 

[piper5177]

[citation][nom]Dave K[/nom]Well photo law doesn't seem to keep people from getting arrested for taking photo's of kids at school. Sure if you're a parent taking a pic of your kid at track you're not going to have a problem, but if you're loitering around taking shots of kids you don't know outside a proper context (basketball players at a game for instance) then you're going to get in trouble... and rightly so:http/www.google.com/search?q=man [...] rt=10&sa=NIf you're sitting in your car taking pictures in someones windows with a high zoom lens you're going to get arrested. The law is obviously unclear... but apparently police are finding ways of getting at people for these behaviors. Perhaps they're applying something like a Peeping Tom law... I'm not sure how they're doing it but they're finding a way. The issue with Google is that it opens the POTENTIAL for someone to use those images for a behavior that would be illegal if they did it live in person. If a convicted sex offender was aprehended driving by your home taking pictures of your kid riding her bike in your driveway... that person WOULD be arrested - yet Google can capture that exact same image and make it available to EVERYONE to access in an essential untraceable manner. I think currently that image quality is crappy enough that it's not such a big dea... but it won't stay that way. That's why this debate is important and needs to take place.[/citation]

Oops wrong quote...


Horrible examples from your link. All of those arrests were not for taking photos at a school. Nice way to substantiate your claim. There is a BIG difference between hiding a camera in a locker room and taking photos of children at a public school. And YES you CAN sit in your car with a zoom lens and take pictures of people through their window. PIs do it all of the time to prove fraud. It is the responsibility of the person in the home to close the drapes. If they ask you not to take pictures repeatedly and you continue to do it then it is harassment and has nothing to do with taking photos. I hate people who make an argument they know nothing about and then post a BS link which supposedly backs up their viewpoint. I am a photographer and I know what I can legally shoot and what I can't.

 

[zachary k]

this is ridiculous, people will fight over the smallest things. its a picture, from the street, which people can see anyway,and 99% of the people who will see it on google earth wont know the person! the only diff is people don't have to cross a ocean to see a strangers house.

 

[mavroxur]

It's not like google is jumping fences and peeking in windows on otherwise private property, they're driving down a public street (as anyone could) and taking pictures visible from a public area. If you dance around naked in front of a window, that's your problem, because you're making yourself visible from a public area. Dont blame Google. Google isnt promoting crime by providing classified photos of your home, anyone could drive down the same street and see the same thing. Some of these people need to climb out of the 1940's and join the modern world. And if the google cars scare you, then you probably shouldnt think about the high-res satellites that the government posesses that can photograph and measure objects down to within a couple inches from space. And before you say "but those satellite images arent available to the public", try google earth, it's a lower res version (albeit, still very detailed) of what they have access to.
And it can see into your back yard (OH NOES!!!)

 

[Guest]

The world has gone mad with an obsession to broadcast their private lives on internet. This is but a disease, literally. There is absolutely no reason for someone to be photographing my hose and then posting it on internet for everybody's view. This whole activitiy is senseless, without reason and a gross invasion of privacy. The only name you can give this acitviity is 'cool'; which in itself shows just how much thought and consideration when into it.

I hope there are still cultutres and societies out there who understand what this really is and just outright ban and punish pursuers of such invasion of privacy.

Let us get real. Some parts of the world do still consider provacy to be very important and very much an issue. Does not matter if your idea of privacy is non-existent ; or you feel no shame in mixing your public and provate lives. But there are foliks who want and intend to keep the two aspects of their lives separate.

 

[piper5177]

[citation][nom]privacy_advocate[/nom]The world has gone mad with an obsession to broadcast their private lives on internet. This is but a disease, literally. There is absolutely no reason for someone to be photographing my hose and then posting it on internet for everybody's view. This whole activitiy is senseless, without reason and a gross invasion of privacy. The only name you can give this acitviity is 'cool'; which in itself shows just how much thought and consideration when into it.I hope there are still cultutres and societies out there who understand what this really is and just outright ban and punish pursuers of such invasion of privacy. Let us get real. Some parts of the world do still consider provacy to be very important and very much an issue. Does not matter if your idea of privacy is non-existent ; or you feel no shame in mixing your public and provate lives. But there are foliks who want and intend to keep the two aspects of their lives separate.[/citation]

There are "privacy laws" in existence. They are not being broken. Go research them and if you don't like them, write to your congressional representative. This is a Democracy, like the UK and Japan claim to be. Laws are voted on, and if enough people disagree with them then they can be amended or changed.

 

[matchboxmatt]

With Google Earth already mapping the entire world, I think that Street View is taking it a bit too far. I don't mind people seeing where I live, but I can understand why people are being unsettled by how everything down to the way their house's look are freely available on the internet.

Given what people can do with personal information, giving a first-person view of the world feels like it would do more harm than good anyway. If you need directions from point-A to point-B, I think maps worked well enough on their own.

 

[daft]

why don't the have complaints about google earth? i can see quite clearly everyones back yard. in fact, it would be easier to plan a crime with standard google earth, due to being able to see yard patters, streets and obsticals of all sorts, than a street view.

 

[Dave K]

You nee[citation][nom]piper5177[/nom]Oops wrong quote...Horrible examples from your link. All of those arrests were not for taking photos at a school. Nice way to substantiate your claim. There is a BIG difference between hiding a camera in a locker room and taking photos of children at a public school. And YES you CAN sit in your car with a zoom lens and take pictures of people through their window. PIs do it all of the time to prove fraud. It is the responsibility of the person in the home to close the drapes. If they ask you not to take pictures repeatedly and you continue to do it then it is harassment and has nothing to do with taking photos. I hate people who make an argument they know nothing about and then post a BS link which supposedly backs up their viewpoint. I am a photographer and I know what I can legally shoot and what I can't.[/citation]

Here's a simpler link: http/www.google.com/search?q=arrested+for+photographing&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:unofficial&hs=pO3&start=50&sa=N&cts=1242336190648

You need to dig deeper than the first page of redundant stories... but the vast majority of articles linked are of people being arrested taking pictures in public spaces. Not many regarding schools but they're in there.

The point is that we are NOT free to take pictures of whatever we feel like - even in "Public". Further... there are situations when a person driving down your street would be breaking the law if he/she took a picture of something, the fact that it's visible from the street does not automatically make anything fair game. There is a line that is not as cut and dried as some would think. Google obviously isn't "jumping fences and peeking into windows"... but of course that's a Red Herring... Google is simply taking pictures, but it's how those pictures could potentially be USED that is the real issue.

If Google goes down your street and takes an image of a child... and a predator sees that image on google and chooses to target that child... then Google has provided that person with the same imagery that they would have risked getting arrested (if a convicted predator) for acquiring in person. It's still the individual that's breaking the law... but does Google bear some responsibility for facilitating that offence? If Google inadvertently captures a naked teen and it ends up all over the internet... then Google has done something that would get ANY individual arrested, even if they took that picture from their apparently law immune car.

These are hypothetical scenarios... but now, when the technology is generally innocuous... is the time to consider the implications.

The Mumbai bombers used Google to help plan their attacks... does that mean that this sort of service should be made illegal... not in my opinion... but what it does mean is that people shouldn't naively dismiss the issues.

 

[Dave K]

[citation][nom]daft[/nom]why don't the have complaints about google earth? i can see quite clearly everyones back yard. in fact, it would be easier to plan a crime with standard google earth, due to being able to see yard patters, streets and obsticals of all sorts, than a street view.[/citation]

IMO the same concern applies... which just points out that it's definitely NOT a simple issue. Governments balance the needs of protection against personal freedoms all the time... and this is no different. At this point the US has limited it's intervention to banning the display of Military bases... but of course that's just a way of saying "We CAN limit the information sites like Google provide".

Does Military Installation banning make sense?
How about Nuclear Power Facilities?
How about Dams?
Government Facilities?
High Profile Civilian targets?
Schools?

Where does the line get drawn? You think you're qualified to draw it? I know I'm not, although we're all entitled to opinions... personally, I don't think Military Facilities should be available for public perusal, and I think that Schools should be... other than that... who knows...

 

[piper5177]

Streetview is a tool, just like any tool. A nail gun could kill someone and an ex-con can buy one without a background check. Should Hilti be held responsible for the ex-con killing someone with it?

Your logic is flawed. The Mumbai bombers could have used plain old maps or tourist guides to plan their attack too. Why is it Google's responsibilty to regulate how someone uses their services. They are not designing it as a tool for pedophiles to randomly target little girls. I agree with the naked teen scenario, and there are photo algorithms designed to filter that type of content.

 

[Dave K]

[citation][nom]piper5177[/nom]Streetview is a tool, just like any tool. A nail gun could kill someone and an ex-con can buy one without a background check. Should Hilti be held responsible for the ex-con killing someone with it?Your logic is flawed. The Mumbai bombers could have used plain old maps or tourist guides to plan their attack too. Why is it Google's responsibilty to regulate how someone uses their services. They are not designing it as a tool for pedophiles to randomly target little girls. I agree with the naked teen scenario, and there are photo algorithms designed to filter that type of content.[/citation]

I don't think the logic is flawed... it's a long standing debate that comes up every time a product can see both legitimate and illegitimate use. Sometimes the value of the legitimate use outweighs the risks... sometimes it doesn't. Personally... I don't see much value in Google street view but I DO see some risk (that will only increase as the technology evolves).

If the Mumbai bombers could have used plain old maps then why didn't they? Obviously because the tools they did use were better. In fact... tools like high resolution satellite imagery and street views provide VASTLY more information about a potential "target" than a map could.

People have this notion that everyone should have access to any information that they want to have at any time... but it's simply not the case. Information is power... and some information can and should be controlled. To simply say "we should have it all" is as I said... naive... you ALREADY don't have access to it all. What an intelligent discussion of the topic would cover is where the line should be... not whether there should be a line.

 

[piper5177]

There is a line, it is the existing privacy laws which "streetview", the topic of this argument, does not violate in any way. So what is the problem? I agree that Google Earth bears review on what should be available, and it is being reviewed, but streetview does nothing that can't be done by any citizen on their own.

 

[Guest]

This week, Greece banned Google from taking photographs citing privacy concerns. What are your feelings on Street View? Do you think a lot of the fuss people make is down to paranoia, or do you feel that Google genuinely doesn't make the effort to protect peoples' privacy when it comes to Google Street View? Leave your thoughts below!

Greece's Data Protection Authority (DPA), has banned Google from gathering detailed, street-level images in Greece (Athens to be exact) for a planned expansion of its Street View mapping service, until the company provides clarification on how it will store and process the original images and safeguard them from privacy abuses. and not only what will be available to public view (blurred faces and car license plates). The DPA also sought clarification on how Google plans to inform the public that its vehicles with mounted cameras are being used to take photographs.

'Simply marking the car is not considered an adequate form of notification,' a DPA statement said. 'The authority has reserved judgment on the legality of the service pending the submission of additional information, and until that time will not allow (Google) to start gathering photographs.'

Google spokeswoman Elaine Filadelfo said the Mountain View, Calif.-based company would be happy to provide the Greek DPA with further clarifications.

'Google takes privacy very seriously, and that's why we have put in place a number of features, including the blurring of faces and license plates, to ensure that Street View will respect local norms when it launches in Greece,' Filadelfo said Tuesday.

Greece has strict privacy laws, giving the DPA broad powers of enforcement.

The authority has repeatedly ruled against Greece's conservative government and banned the use of street cameras for fighting crime. The cameras were set up as part of elaborate security preparations for the 2004 Olympics in Athens.

It also clashed with the Greek Orthodox Church after it ruled that recording Greek citizens' religion on state ID cards was illegal.

The DPA on Monday also ordered a Greek mapping site, kapou.gr, to suspend a similar street-level image service until it provides further privacy clarifications and uses face-blurring on its online images. The Greek site on Tuesday said it had stopped posting photographs while it was upgrading its service.

 

[Guest]

"It's perfectly legal to take pictures on public property..."

That's the problem. Perfectly legal where? In America? So what!? Does the entire world share one set of unified laws, regulations & ethics??? If in Greece, Google Street View was banned, then guess what: IT'S NOT LEGAL. Not there anyway. Since when did one country or corporation have the "right" to push its views of what's OK on people from thousands of miles away? Sure, that sort of thing happens all the time anyway... But if Greece says, "Hey Google, you're banned." Then too bad buddy! Each nation (or even municipality) has the "right" to regulate.

 

[bin1127]

let just say the japanese doesn't like pictures of their houses taken. unlike in america you're not a celebrity until you have pictures of your pants down (or none in many cases).

 

[demonhorde665]

i could give two shits less about privacy or the whole aiding crime arguments.ruth be told these poeple ASKED that google not take photosof THEIR home. corperations should resepct this and leve those peopel alone. perosnally i dotn care what google does , but when some one ask you not to do something YOU DONT DO IT. period. fas for this BS abotu right to take pics of private property from a public locations .. it is BS. if you saw a random strangers takign photos of your home more than likely you'd report them to the police. and as for teh vacation argument some one mentioned .. i call BS beucae ther is a BIG diference from a vaction accidental "home" shot , and some one bassically "casing" your place with thier camera.

 

[Guest]

it sure is nice to visit places you've never visited before with Google street maps! But I fear this information could reach terrorists, and throw bombs at buildings they never knew where there before google maps existed.

For good people this is a good and even a great tool!
But lately with crime on the rise...
They don't even let children walk from home to the busstop alone anymore.


One thing I noticed is that seemingly google street cars are not photographing monuments that serve for tourism. But many people upload their pictures and paste it on google.
I love to see the earth trough the eyes of a sattelite, seeing how many people are on this earth, and how many houses are everywhere.
It makes you ponder that there will be so many lives that you'll never see or hear from, but yet have their own life going on!

 

[theramman]

I personally think people are blowing this out of wack.
I went and looked up my house and was dissapointed that my other house wasnt done. I think its "NEAT" and a helpful tool. Im looking @ moving to a diffrent city and ive been using the street view as much as i can to at least get a glimps of what the house/apartment might look like since I can go down there yet.

But people scared of the internet and tha boogyman will probably not like this service but for us that embrace tech will get some good out of it.

(Note: I wish i knew when they were coming so I could captin morgan out side by my truck )