back to article Google protects Colonel Sanders' privacy

It's good to see that Google, currently somewhat on the ropes regarding Street View privacy, is walking it like it talks it when it comes to protecting innocent individuals from international cyberexposure: Colonel Sanders blurred on Street View Hmmmm. We suppose it could be argued that Street View is actually protecting …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. SuperTim
    Thumb Up

    That isnt Col. Sanders

    And if you allege it is, you are in breach of privacy laws.

    Thumb lickin' good!

  2. amanfromMars Silver badge

    Keep Up the Good Work, Google. Turning the other Cheek is a Gas.

    "Now it just needs to get its strumpet-arse-blurring algorithm working properly. ®" ......


    I would just like to say that I think it is working just perfectly the way it is. Although higher definition for deeper involvement is always a respectable goal for an Algorithm on AIMission. :-)

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wait what?

    Did you really just write an article on street view's face detection working exactly as it should do? "Face blurring technology found to blur faces, more at 11"

  4. Sampler

    This just in...

    Colonel Sanders caught eating at Burger King:

  5. D@v3

    not just KFC

    but posters as well apparantly,-0.231872&sspn=0,359.986181&ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.492549,-0.229686&panoid=G7ftlTUozpS6b64Hzl8VhA&cbp=12,336.31,,0,0.67&ll=51.492553,-0.229855&spn=0,359.972363&z=15&iwloc=A

  6. Anonymous Coward

    The more important point is this...

    How do you KNOW it's Colonel Sanders, despite the blurring? Well, it's obvious. You know from the context of (a) the location and (b) the surrounding colours, his outfit, etc.

    Couldn't you do exactly the same for an ACTUAL person - for example, a person near their home, wearing an outfit they always wear?

    And therefore is blurring faces really enough to protect people's privacy?

    I don't really care myself, but just a thought ;)

  7. A J Stiles


    Clearly this is a propaganda exercise! By blurring out even artificial faces, Google are trying to make out that the blurring process is automatic and indiscriminate.

  8. D@v3

    in my defense

    That link was the url in the page i was looking at, it just doesnt correspond to the image i was looking at (for some googlish reason)

    this should work,-0.229855&sspn=0,359.95451&ie=UTF8&ll=51.378853,-0.242214&spn=0.033054,0.090981&z=14&iwloc=A&layer=c&cbll=51.378781,-0.242056&panoid=AewXRVkU352Wom-sEFOnOQ&cbp=12,10.07,,1,16.01

  9. Hans

    missing the point?

    You seem to be forgetting what Google is all about, and how it raises it revenues.

    I believe it is only a matter of time before all such street-side establishments receive a bill through the door, from Google "For advertising services provided by Street View"

    (Notice the intentional omission of the "Joke Alert" icon)

  10. John H 66

    I know the 11.

    I really do. Haw Haw.

    No... you can't just google it either :P

  11. Anonymous Coward


    I'd rather have things that aren't faces blurred than not have some faces blurred.

    Or maybe they should just blur the entire image.

  12. Ian Michael Gumby


    While what you said in jest, the fact that KFC has made the request shows that it is going through the motions to protect its trademark.

    Google is complying with the request because even if the 'street view' shot was taken in the public, the use is part of a 'for profit' venture. So they either have to compenstate KFC or comply.

    So what we should all do is trademark the front face of our houses and then order Google to blur them out! ;-)

  13. Anonymous Coward

    next up in the news

    Google re-shooting street view in japan to not show grumblers over the fence. ho-hum

  14. Oninoshiko

    @Ian Michael Gumby

    more likely then not, the face detection algo decided that the cartoon Col. Sanders was a real person, not that KFC is protecting their trademark.

    actually because of the context, it is in actual reference to KFC, this is not a trademark violation.

  15. raving angry loony

    not effective

    More proof that the incomplete blurring of the face that they're doing DOESN'T DO A DAMN THING to protect the privacy of those they snap. Asshats.

  16. Stephen Gray

    It doesnt work on bears

    Goto Google Maps, type in 54 Great Russell St, Camden Town click on Street view and there is Paddington Bear and he's still got a face....

  17. William Oakley

    Same with Kings Head

    Google protecting innocent pubs..

  18. mittfh


    He gets around...also spotted at Trafalgar Square (unblurred, of course!):,-0.127481&panoid=ZX7jlmg9lV4npvbYU3uBUw&cbp=12,289.26,,1,10.89&ie=UTF8&ll=51.507434,-0.127995&spn=0,359.985859&z=16

    At first I thought he'd been digitally inserted, but you can also see him from the opposite side of the roundabout.

  19. Stephen Gray


    Its clear that this is the first indicator of an imminent invasion, I had been stockpiling marmalade sandwiches to bribe our hairy overlords but now I've been told I need Marmite instead....

  20. sweetbayag

    thanks google

    at least they did! i salute them :)

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like