Comments on: Couple Sues Google for Street View Photos on Private Road

By: A

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:14:13 +0000

So if I rent a house, how much is my privacy worth, and from whom (Google or my landlord) should I receive compensation? (Is a renter’s privacy worth less than that of a homeowner?)

By: Angel

Angel — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:25:52 +0000

It a gret tool for the local tax assesor

By: Angel

Angel — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:25:08 +0000

Its not about value its about safety. They are showing peoples back yards and homes. This shows who ever is looking that there may be kids there or something of value. It also give thief’s a great view of a persons home and the access or hidden access ability. We must be careful at what we unleash and who it effects.

By: Jordan McCollum

Jordan McCollum — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:06:31 +0000

And most professionals are there by invitation of the client (and/or someone who has made an offer on their house).

By: John McLaughlin

John McLaughlin — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:58:25 +0000

Thanks Jordan,

I’ve read lots of agreements – none that I’ve read address photos of owner property from a public or private street.

Most professionals don’t stop at the street; they walk on property to get better pictures for their mortgage related clients.

John McLaughlin, Day Trader – Consultant / Coach
[link removed]

Former Realtor & Real Estate Appraiser

By: Jordan McCollum

Jordan McCollum — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:50:33 +0000

@John—Actually, in most cases it’s well-settled law that taking a picture from public property (a public road) is not an invasion of privacy. This was not a public road.

Furthermore, I’m sure that somewhere in the agreement that most real estate agents have their clients sign there’s already some sort of clause to deal with this, if necessary.

By: Paul Baranda

Paul Baranda — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:25:20 +0000

I agree Kyle, that they are certainly adding more attention to themselves if they so value their privacy. But Google street views can easily impose a security threat in many levels. One cannot sleep easily at night knowing their property is being watched by millions on Google from anywhere in the world. Then again, it could help deter any breaking and entering crimes by looking at it on the other side of the spectrum. Lol

By: Kyle

Kyle — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:32:21 +0000

If the Borings truely value their privacy, you would think they would refrain from high-media interest lawsuits that will only result in a loss of privacy on a scale they have never seen before. It’s funny how these people believe that they are so interesting, that the rest of the world wants to surf around streets they’ve never been to, and will never go to so that they can invade their privacy. Don’t they realize, their last name is even boring?

By: John McLaughlin

John McLaughlin — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 06:09:40 +0000

Well now, all the real estate appraisers beware.

No photos of the subject property without an attorney’s document signed by all the owners.

No photos of all the comparable sales, required by the banks, FNMA, and so on.

Wonder how long it will take to get a loan processed with the Google case setting into place new laws on privacy?

Lighten up – literally, for the camera that is – you cannot escape the camera’s eye, privacy laws or not.

John McLaughlin, Day Traders – Consultant / Coach
[link removed]

By: Billy Wiseman

Billy Wiseman — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:05:38 +0000

Will people ever learn that doing this sort of thing will have expontentially the opposite effect of what was intended by filing the suit?
nope its a new get rich scheme,,

By: Mapper99

Mapper99 — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:53:54 +0000

Here are some new images, right in someones driveway:

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com/tech/story/google-is-getting-in-ho t-water-for-thi

By: Forumistan

Forumistan — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 23:56:19 +0000

I think $25,000 is very high damage.

By: Jordan McCollum

Jordan McCollum — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:57:11 +0000

@Jake—Considering that none of us here know the precise legal nature of the easement, the property line, etc., it seems a bit premature to dismiss the case out of hand.

And, as I did mention in the article, of course they have no legal standing to ask them to destroy images taken from another person’s private property. However, any owner of the road could invoke that right, and if they do own their own driveway, they certainly have that right.

By: Prosperity Writer

Prosperity Writer — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:18:56 +0000

i think people have a right to their privacy. you wouldn’t want your address or a picture of your house published for everyone to see. you can never know if some pervert is watching.

By: Futon-Matt

Futon-Matt — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 15:15:48 +0000

This has to be one of the most ridiculous stories I’ve heard in a while. This all boils down to greed and trying to get something for nothing.

By: Steven Bradley

Steven Bradley — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 02:50:56 +0000

It’s an interesting case. I read the AP story last night and the couple didn’t seem unreasonable. Then again they’re going to gain more attention for suing Google than the images would have ever bought them.

They also claim the images are going to reduce the value of the property, which I have a hard time seeing.

They don’t seem like they’re all about the money. They’re fine with other pictures of their house that were taken from the public road. I don’t see where the damages are, but I think this might be more about the principle than the money.

By: Mobile guy

Mobile guy — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:53:34 +0000

Interesting intersection of digital property and real one.

By: JakePitt of JakePitt.com

JakePitt of JakePitt.com — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:07:18 +0000

The article doesn’t make it clear, but the question comes down to the easement.

If the homeowners aren’t the primary owners of the land that the private road runs over but just have an easement to use it, they have no standing to sue Google and the suit’ll get kicked out of court.

If the homeowners actually DO own the land, but have just granted an easement for other people to use the private road to get to their house, they have granted Google permission to use it to get to their house, and Google has every right to take a picture along the way.

Sorry, Jordan. This lawsuit actually does NOT have any legal merit at all.

-JP

[link removed]

By: mikey777

mikey777 — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 10:18:50 +0000

I think they have a right to sue, at least in this day and age. I’m sure Google would sue them if pics were taken of some ‘private’ Google property, so why not? They could have asked for permission and avoided the whole thing.

By: Jayson

Jayson — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 05:47:02 +0000

I guess that doesn’t seem to unreasonable – 25,000 isn’t even close to the 40 billion that most people suing companies ask for.

@Iowa Forum can you post a link?