Mr and Mrs Boring sue Google

newsguy 0 Tallied Votes 390 Views Share

It would appear that by the owners of a house in the Franklin Park suburb of Pittsburgh because the search giants photographed the property and included it in the Google Maps street view feature.

Why anyone would want to take an interest in the boring house, yes according to the reports the couple who have sued are called Aaron and Christine Boring, is beyond me. It pretty much lives up to the boring tag. However, the complaint states that "a major component of their purchase decision was a desire for privacy" and it is that privacy which has been violated according to the Borings, along with a devaluation of the property. I am not 100 percent sure how it is devalued, but there you go. They do have a point regarding privacy though, as it would appear the Google snappers had to drive up a driveway clearly marked as private in order to take the photographs.

Of course, the real irony is that no court case was required as Google will happily remove photographs upon the request of the proven owner whereas now that the litigation has attracted publicity there are photos of the house popping up all over the web. Not least the Allegheny County real estate site which reveals information about most every property in the county, including photos. In the case of the Boring house, it tells us how much the couple paid for it, the size of the house and the land attached, how many rooms it has and so on.

Google Street viewers wanting to find something more interesting, such as a headless man and a giant pumpkin, should look no further that the Top 15 Google Street View Sightings page however…

Dani AI

Generated

A short expert note to add context to the thread and the legal / practical takeaways raised by , , and others.

The Borings’ dispute began when Street View imagery showed their Franklin Park, PA, home; after years of litigation the parties entered a consent judgment in which Google acknowledged trespass and the case was resolved for $1 (the judgment was limited to this pair of plaintiffs). (cbsnews.com)

Legal takeaway for readers: courts generally allow photographs taken from public rights-of-way (the “plain view” idea), so simply appearing on Street View is normally not actionable. Trespass claims succeed only if the recorder actually entered private land or exceeded public access (the Borings’ claim survived appeal on the trespass theory because they alleged the car drove up a private lane). These distinctions explain why many privacy claims against imagery providers fail unless there is alleged physical entry. (floridabar.org)

Practical steps for homeowners who want less visibility (rather than litigation): 1) Use the Street View “Report a problem” / blur request (find the view in Google Maps -> Report a Problem -> request blur; Google says a house blur is permanent). 2) Check local assessor/MLS or county property pages and ask those sites to remove or restrict photos if possible. 3) Remove or hide identifying info on public listings and social sites. 4) If imagery was taken by entering private property, document dates and signage (No Trespassing), save screenshots, and consult a local attorney — but weigh the publicity cost of a lawsuit. ()

A final note on strategy: public complaints or lawsuits can produce the opposite result (more copies of an image circulate). As several posters hinted, a quick blur request and cleaning up other public records is usually faster and less costly than headline litigation. (cbsnews.com)

jwenting 1,905 duckman Team Colleague

it's about time someone did something about Google's ever more intrusive spying into peoples' lives.
And these people probably took that into consideration when they decided to challenge Google's business practice of not asking permission before publishing things they have no right to publish without permission.

Google did the same (or planned to) with their "Google library" where they were to publish the content of entire books online unless the author told them not to afterwards, in the full knowledge that doing so is a breach of copyright law.
But Google thought they could get away with it because they're so powerful, so they don't care about the law.

Of course as soon as someone does something Google doesn't like, they're onto them like a ton of bricks.

Mapper99 0 Light Poster

It's a good thing they weren't skinny dipping in their pool like some of these other unfortunate Google Street View victims:

Drezta 0 Newbie Poster

yay go big cousin (not BB because BB is the state...)
it is a problem with all organisations when they get to a certain size but did the Borings not realise that by complaining loudly the internet people would just do the opposite...

>shadow< 11 Posting Pro

yeah well its not like google cant afford another lawsuit

jbennet 1,618 Most Valuable Poster Team Colleague Featured Poster

fuck off (test for danis new lang filter)

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.