On a cold and frosty winter morning in December, the Google street view car passed through Barga photographing the streets and houses of the city. Those images have finally arrived on line. Some of the people photographed are easily recognisable plus one of two images of somebody else photographing the Google car as it sped through the district.
According to Google, their Google Maps with Street View lets you explore places around the world through 360-degree street-level imagery. They go on to say “You can check out restaurants, visit neighbourhood, or plan your next trip.” It sounds like a very positive idea but not everybody agrees with Google. In fact after a little bit of digging through the archives that are on the Internet up comes the surprising fact that the famous “DO NO EVIL” – corporate motto or slogan of Google, does not actually exist and never did. The official corporate philosophy of Google does not contain the the apocryphal “don’t be evil” motto (so widely circulated by the media). The statement that most resembles it is the sixth point of the 10-point corporate philosophy of Google which says, “You can make money without doing evil.”
Privacy advocates have objected to the Google Street View feature, pointing to views found to show men leaving strip clubs, protesters at an abortion clinic, sunbathers in bikinis, cottagers at public parks, people picking up prostitutes and people engaging in activities visible from public property in which they do not wish to be photographed and published online. Google maintains that the photos were taken from public property. However, this does not take into account that Google’s cameras take pictures from an elevated position, enabling them to look over hedges and walls designed to prevent public insight into properties. Before launching the service, Google removed photos of domestic violence shelters, and it allows users to flag inappropriate or sensitive imagery for Google to review and remove. When the service was first launched, the process for requesting that an image be removed was not trivial, but Google has changed its policy to make removal more straightforward. Images of potential break-ins, sunbathers, and individuals entering adult bookstores have, however, remained active and these images have been widely republished.
no images were found
In Europe, the creation of Google Street View may not be legal in all jurisdictions. Some European countries have laws prohibiting the filming without consent of an individual on public property for the purpose of public display.
Google has been told by European Union data privacy regulators to warn people before it sends cameras out to take pictures for its Street View maps. The online search giant should shorten the length of time for which it keeps the uncensored photographs it takes from one year to six months, the regulators also said in a letter to the company.
Google said its need to retain the original Street View images for a full year is “legitimate and justified” in a statement.
The company said it already posts notifications on its website about where its cameras are being sent. The alert function indicated yesterday that Google’s picture-taking vehicles had been cruising the streets of Cagiliari in Italy, Nantes in France and possibly other nearby cities.
Street View launched in the United States in 2007 and now adds photographs of real-life street scenes to Google’s maps of around 100 cities worldwide.
It uses picture-editing software to blur pictures of faces and car license plates in a bid to soothe privacy concerns.
But the company has been slow to roll out the service in Europe after governments raised concerns that taking pictures of people in public places could break some EU rules on personal privacy.
Greece last year ordered the firm to halt plans to photograph the nation’s streets until more privacy safeguards were put in place. Residents of Broughton in Buckinghamshire formed a human chain to stop a camera van entering the village in April.
Google has also bowed to German demands to erase the raw footage of faces, house numbers and license plates of individuals who have told authorities they do not want their information used in the service.
Alex Turk, the head of EU data protection agencies, told Google’s data privacy chief in a letter dated February 11 that the company should always give advance notice of camera van destinations on its website and in the local or national press before it takes pictures.
It must avoid taking pictures “of a sensitive nature and those containing intimate details not normally observable by a passer-by,” Turk said in the message to Peter Fleischer.
He added that the company should revise its “disproportionate” policy of keeping the original unblurred images for up to a year, saying improvements in Google’s blurring technology and better public awareness would lead to fewer complaints and a shorter delay for people to react to the photos they see on the site.
Complaints about the images put online would usually be checked against the original photos.
Viviane Reding, the EU Justice Commissioner, said that Europe had “high standards for data protection” and that she expected that “all companies play according to the rules of the game”.
The data privacy warning comes a day after an Italian court convicted three Google executives – including Fleischer – of privacy violations because they did not act quickly enough to remove an online video that showed sadistic teen bullies mocking and hitting an autistic boy.
Google said it would appeal the case, claiming the ruling was an attack on freedom of speech on the internet.
More images on google can be seen here
I personally don’t think the google street thing is a big deal, but it’s understandable that some people might find it inappropriate and a violation of their privacy- regardless of whether the information might be used to aid criminal activity, the real point is that people should be able to opt out of having personal information (i.e. pictures of their homes where the inside might be visible through the windows) broadcast on the ‘net without their consent. It’s a human rights issue. Like I said, it doesn’t bother me, as a street-view image is only one step past the ariel images of our houses that are already online, but some people think this is a step too far. Fair enough, I say- maybe we need some legislation brought in to force the use of disclaimers for this sort of thing, as the interests of the public in a democracy should be more important than the interests of an international conglomerate…