Boring couple loses case against Google
THE COUPLE THAT sued Google claiming that the firm's Street View represents an invasion of their privacy have lost their case.
Aaron and Christine Boring said that Google had "significantly disregarded privacy interests" when it photographed their house.
They said having their home visible on Google's Street View caused them "mental suffering" and asked for $25,000 in damages
But a judge in the US District Court for Western Pennsylvania dismissed the case, saying the Borings "failed to state a claim under any count."
Google said privacy no longer exists, what with all these new-fangled satellites in the sky and CCTV and what have you. And there's nothing wrong with cars cruising the streets taking shots of people in their underwear, it said.
The judge agreed. µ
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Just Looking At HOME Makes ME Spittle "Penalty For Private Use.", Postcards, each with address & lasar pic of building being taxed. Hey-I'll Call Magassitrate if don't cough Up. In trying 7install,that hangs, on 690G, ended up throwing off xp sp3 beta curse & now am xp(32). its like Linuex or something, how can people even touch it?isshhhhh! STeWie Drashek
Consider:
1. A house is built in an area where members of the public can easily see it from the street. No one takes any action when said members of the public inadvertantly look at the house.
2. At some later date, the Google-mobiles cruise along the street, snapping and mapping panoramic photos. The house then appears in Google Maps Street View. Remember that this house can still be looked at in real life by passers-by, with a more up-to-date (i.e. current) view.
To say that Google is allowing people around the world to view the house is absurd; if people elsewhere could afford the airfare just to walk along a street in Pittsburgh, they'd have exactly the same view as Google Maps offers (according to the lawsuit, the street is signposted as "Private"; whether or not this, as well as unannounced Google's photography, counts as trespassing is still up for debate). How anyone can have experienced "mental suffering" from such a non-invasion of non-privacy is beyond me.
And by creating a huge fuss over the matter they have, Streisand-like, garnered more attention than before and encouraged even more people to view their house than previously. While Google have taken down the images of the house, several sites had already taken screengrabs of the offending Street View panoramas before Google took any action; a Google Images search will still show the house.
"Warning! The requested document is not available for the following reason(s):
* It appears you linked into this document from a non-trusted location: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/044/1051044/boring-couple-loses-google.
To gain access to this document please contact your instructor or the library for assistance. "
So this is what I saw when I followed the link, seems they don't like you! Also when I selected and right clicked to copy the text it said "right click has been disabled for this page," so I pressed ctrl-C, oooh that works, pointless restrictions or what?
I'm glad the courts had the sense to toss this lawsuit out. $25,000 because your already publically viewable house is now photographed from a public place (the street)? I can only imagine the terrible precedent this would set, and the amount of other ridiculous lawsuits this would spawn.
Anyway, Google shouldn't have to pay $25,000 to fix this Boring couple's preexisting mental problem that brought on this lawsuit in the first place.