Google scrubs urinating woman from Street View If you're ever caught short in broad daylight and decide you really must relieve yourself behind a parked car, it's probably a good idea to make sure there isn't one of Google's Orwellian Street View spymobiles lurking nearby: Urinating woman caught on Street View According to Spanish paper El Mundo, this delightful Madrid …
I'm sorry - that was such an obvious title but it had to be done. The story sort-of leads us to all the debate about ID cards, The old bollocks about "if you have nothing to hide then you have no reason not to have an ID card", which has been phrased far more succinctly in the past sort-of fits in here. Yes, okay, she was not identifiable from that shot - at least by a stranger - but what if this was at the end of an office party and she was recognised by her boss? Okay - her activity was a little anti-social or unfortunate but - hey - what if it led to a criminal conviction? I could imagine Judge Dredd turning up there.
So - while I applaud Google for scrubbing the image (and gaining some PR in the meantime - after all, they didn't have to tell anybody about this, did they?), doesn't it worry you about how much is actually being recorded from sources that don't necessarily have to follow all the applicable privacy laws?
This post has been deleted by its author
It's automatic, google takes rather a lot of pictures to go through them manually one-by-one.
http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2008/05/street-view-revisits-manhattan.html
It also protects horses and hub-caps as well.
Similair interesting technology for CCTV http://inhardfocus.com/2008/05/more-cool-privacy-tech.html
I think if the street had been in England, Google would have been guilty of a criminal offence. OTOH so would the woman. BUT... it would require the woman to complain to Plod about Google. And it would require Google to complain to Plod about the woman, as we can assume there was no-one else in her vicinity who could (or possibly would) have a genuine complaint. (Of course, as Whacky Jacqui probably believes, the concept of a female exhibitionist is quite absurd).
The question El Mundo needs to ask is should anyone expect privacy on a public street? The person in the photo may be urinating or picking up a spilled drink (we can hope..). Either way, do you expect nobody to see you on a public street? Just curious. I bet their story would change if the lady had been mugged...
When she street-weed she hid down behind the car, so, yes, she wanted a certain level of privacy.
14: Which head do they remove?
17: Is the policeman obliged to take it off?
8: I better not go to Kentucky then. [Six *feet* did he say, oh that's all right then.]
You DIDN'T have an expectation of privacy because when the laws were made there was no such thing as google street view. No such thing as a person taking your photo and being able to humiliate you in front of millions of people in a matter of days.
If a tv channel did that, you would be able to sue them. What for? Invasion of privacy for one.
No expectation of privacy also went with the expectation that your activities were limited to the..12 people? you passed on the street. If they stopped to take a photo it would be fairly obvious what was going on, and fairly easy to dodge it or ask what your photo would be used for. At most, the person would show it to a dozen family members then it would fester in a drawer forever.
If they somehow happened to be taking the photo to publish in a magazine they would generally need the persons permission. Specifically if the photo was for profit. Even if this all this happened, it would be extremely rare. So there were no need for strict photography laws.
Not to mention the fact that almost every person on the street is now walking around with a camera and in some cases video camera in their pocket (cameraphone). Not to mention the fact that digital cameras used to be almost unheard of and now you can pick one up for the cost of an old camera, plus film and processing.
Are you REALLY trying to say that nothing has changed and the laws don't need to be tightened/changed in ANY way?
If you are, you are probably selfish person who enjoys seeing others exploited and is not using their full brain capacity, not to mention has no idea what logic or context is and thinks in black and white, oh and has a philosophy of "if it doesn't affect me, I don't care" and the closely related "it'll never happen to me". (Until it does.)
Maybe it's unrealistic to expect privacy if you're pissing in a public street, but I really hope we haven't reached an age where we should expect to be recorded all the time. That's pretty horrible. Does that mean someone can film me if I'm outside and do whatever they like with the images? She probably thought she MIGHT be seen by someone on the street, not have her picture shown all around the internet.
I was under the impression that we were already recorded all the time. Isn't the problem that CCTV is looking at you just about everywhere ? That you can't even be walking down the road, have a quick glance around, and then on seeing no one, scratch your arse or adjust your tackle without it getting caught and available for someone's entertainment ?
This is a great example of the "hacker" mentality at work:
"All I did was take the picture and post it. It is not my fault how it turned out. Maybe I'll take some more pictures and laugh about it to my buddies."
My point is that whoever took the pictures does have a responsibility to make sure they are fit for their purpose. When a picture of my house showed up as more fuel for Google's bottom line there was fortunately nothing embarrassing therein. Had some sick creep done it after the hurricane went through things might well have been different.
Are all the people here who are complaining about Google taking pictures of everything that is in public the same lot of people who complain every time the police stop someone taking photos of things?
Cant have it both ways. You have to choose freedom of information or not...
Personally I'd kinda like it if people who were pissing all over the place to have a bit of a talking to...
They clearly haven't removed the image...
http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8238/googleearthfb7.gif
Zoom in a couple of times and you can clearly see the woman
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=calle+Cefeo+madrid&sll=37.09024,-95.712891&sspn=38.365962,64.072266&ie=UTF8&g=calle+Cefeo+madrid&layer=c&cbll=40.39909,-3.719071&panoid=Giq7Zpjwx2TM0FCvsTFQhA&cbp=12,73.59643760668116,,2,5.014018949827062&ll=40.399166,-3.718915&spn=0.006896,0.013819&z=16&iwloc=addr
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
