OMEN
02-18-2009, 10:46 PM
Federal judge rules against couple that claimed Street View house photos invaded its privacy
A federal judge has dismissed a privacy-related lawsuit filed against Google Inc. by a couple in Pennsylvania after the company posted images of the plaintiffs outside of their house as part of the Street View feature in its Google Maps service.
The lawsuit, filed in April 2008, drew public attention because it sought to challenge Google's right to take street-level photos for use in Street View — a practice that also has raised privacy issues for Google in other countries.
But on Tuesday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Amy Reynolds Hay granted Google's request to dismiss the lawsuit, ruling that the plaintiffs had "failed to state a claim under any count."
Aaron and Christine Boring, alleged that, among other things, Google had invaded their privacy, acted negligently, unjustly enriched itself and trespassed upon their Pittsburgh property, which includes a private road leading to their house.
The Borings were seeking compensatory and punitive damages from Google. They also asked that the images in question be removed from Street View, a request that Google has complied with.
However, in the dismissal ruling issued in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh, Hay rejected a request from the Borings for a permanent injunction preventing Google from showing the photos of their property. "The plaintiffs have failed to plead — much less set out facts supporting — a plausible claim of entitlement to injunctive relief," the judge wrote.
Google employees take the Street View images from cars equipped with cameras. The photos offer a 360-degree, street-level view of roads and buildings and are meant to complement the other Maps views, such as satellite and terrain images.
In a statement sent via e-mail today by a Google spokeswoman, the company said it is pleased with the ruling in the Pennsylvania case, adding that it felt the lawsuit lacked merit.
"Google respects individual privacy," the company said. "We blur identifiable faces and license plates in Street View, and we offer easy-to-use removal tools so users can decide for themselves whether or not they want a given image to appear in Street View. It is unfortunate the parties involved decided to pursue litigation instead of making use of these tools."
The attorney representing the Borings in the case didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling.
Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law and director of its High Tech Law Institute, said the judge's decision was the right one. "I wasn't impressed with the lawsuit to begin with," Goldman said. "Mercifully, the judge was able to kick it out before it consumed too much of everyone's time."
Assuming that Google's driver made a mistake by entering the private road belonging to the Borings and taking the Street View photos, the couple had a number of options for addressing the situation that didn't involve filing a lawsuit, Goldman said. Taking legal action was "overkill" and "a completely disproportionate response to the problem," he added.
IDG
A federal judge has dismissed a privacy-related lawsuit filed against Google Inc. by a couple in Pennsylvania after the company posted images of the plaintiffs outside of their house as part of the Street View feature in its Google Maps service.
The lawsuit, filed in April 2008, drew public attention because it sought to challenge Google's right to take street-level photos for use in Street View — a practice that also has raised privacy issues for Google in other countries.
But on Tuesday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Amy Reynolds Hay granted Google's request to dismiss the lawsuit, ruling that the plaintiffs had "failed to state a claim under any count."
Aaron and Christine Boring, alleged that, among other things, Google had invaded their privacy, acted negligently, unjustly enriched itself and trespassed upon their Pittsburgh property, which includes a private road leading to their house.
The Borings were seeking compensatory and punitive damages from Google. They also asked that the images in question be removed from Street View, a request that Google has complied with.
However, in the dismissal ruling issued in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh, Hay rejected a request from the Borings for a permanent injunction preventing Google from showing the photos of their property. "The plaintiffs have failed to plead — much less set out facts supporting — a plausible claim of entitlement to injunctive relief," the judge wrote.
Google employees take the Street View images from cars equipped with cameras. The photos offer a 360-degree, street-level view of roads and buildings and are meant to complement the other Maps views, such as satellite and terrain images.
In a statement sent via e-mail today by a Google spokeswoman, the company said it is pleased with the ruling in the Pennsylvania case, adding that it felt the lawsuit lacked merit.
"Google respects individual privacy," the company said. "We blur identifiable faces and license plates in Street View, and we offer easy-to-use removal tools so users can decide for themselves whether or not they want a given image to appear in Street View. It is unfortunate the parties involved decided to pursue litigation instead of making use of these tools."
The attorney representing the Borings in the case didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling.
Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law and director of its High Tech Law Institute, said the judge's decision was the right one. "I wasn't impressed with the lawsuit to begin with," Goldman said. "Mercifully, the judge was able to kick it out before it consumed too much of everyone's time."
Assuming that Google's driver made a mistake by entering the private road belonging to the Borings and taking the Street View photos, the couple had a number of options for addressing the situation that didn't involve filing a lawsuit, Goldman said. Taking legal action was "overkill" and "a completely disproportionate response to the problem," he added.
IDG