Google SnoopMobile invades p2pnet turf
p2pnet news view Advertising | P2P:- Huge advertising company Google figures it can go where it wants to go, do what it wants to do.
And that includes taking pictures of peoples’ houses for use in online advertising projects without bothering to ask if it’s OK with the owners.
“The chances of Google employees showing up to take pictures of p2pnet’s palatial headquarters on the Republic of Vancouver Island aren’t high,” I posted recently, going on:
“But company minions are busily snapping snooporama pics of everyone else, everywhere else, whether they like it or not —-
—- and sometimes getting it wrong. Ask Paul McCartney.”
We — my wife, Liz, daughter, Emma, and I — live in a tiny village on Vancouver Island in British Columbia, Canada.
Yesterday afternoon we were out walking the dog when Lo! — a car with a big pylon thingie on top cruised slowly by.
I recognised it immediately (that’s me in the bright yellow shirt with my middle finger extended, should the driver read this) and Emma went running home to get her camera.
The Gargle SnoopMobile had already been up and down our crescent by the time she arrived back, but I managed to snap it as it drove by the end of our street.
Because Gargoyle SnoopMobiles are now prowling the world making Snoop-O-Ramas for display on the Net.
Launched on May 25, 2007, Goggle Street View, “has gradually expanded to include more cities, and in these cities more streets, and also some rural areas,” says Wikipedia.
Then, “On November 21, 2008, Street View was added to the Maps application installed on all of Apple iPhones. On December 10, 2008, Street View was added to the Maps application for S60 3rd Edition. Street view has now also been added to the Windows Mobile version of Google Maps. All versions of Google Maps for Android feature street view, and the digital compass can be used to look around the locations.”
And you KNOW Goople never does ANYTHING unless there’s an advertising hook in it, or on it, somewhere.
But no one asked me or my neighbours if it was cool with us for pictures of our houses to be shown online on its featured Street View project.
So is it kosher for Google to do this?
Firms engaged in this kind of activity, “have to let citizens know that they are going to be photographing the streets of their city, when this will happen, why and how they can have their image removed if they don’t want it in a database,” says the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, releasing Captured on Camera to help Canadians understand privacy issues surrounding street-level imaging applications such as Google StreetView and a similar product offered by Canpages. (html, pdf)
“Under Canadian privacy law you should know when your picture is being taken for commercial reasons, and what your image will be used for,” says the commissioner’s office.
No doubt Gargle will be getting in touch to let me know when the picture of my house is due for an appearance, just to make sure …
Not.
What are my chances of getting it to take blank the Snoop-O-Rama out, as it did with Beatle Paul McCartney’s House when he complained, do you think?
Cheers!
_______________
UPDATE: Google gets back to p2pnet — please “correct one thing”…
Jon Newton – Google Advertising Props Supplier
June, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Middle finger extended? Seriously, I expected a cross-check at the very least Jon… tsk tsk.
Makes me glad I live in a village where the cows outnumber the people. I doubt Google will be there anytime soon.
Maps is invaluable, but I still fail to see enough use from Street View to make up for the privacy invasion, perceived or otherwise.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:24 am
Here, bears, elk and deer outnumber the people. But it doesn’t make any difference.
Cheers!
June 16th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Curses. I guess I’ll start living up to my nick and start covering my house in tinfoil.
June 16th, 2009 at 10:47 am
I live in a small town south of Atlanta, USA. Saw one of the Gargoyle snoops a few weeks ago, in a hurry, getting out i assume. these asshats think they own the world!!
June 16th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Jon, what are those funny looking green things in the background?
June 16th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
@ Jazz: Dunno. But there are all kinds of big bald patches on the mountains, around here, where those green things used to be.
Cheers!
June 16th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I hope you got permission to photograph that house across the street.
June 16th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
I’m waiting for a few big-time burglars to figure out that streetview is the perfect way to scope the houses they’re going to rob. I’m 99% sure that it’s going to happen.
If Google wanted to allow me to take a snapshot of my own house and post it on their site with an address, that’s fine. But it’s my property, my privacy, and potentially my safety at stake for their negligent practices.
I didn’t catch them on their way through my neighborhood, unfortunately. I know they were here — they have a picture of my house — but of course, I have no recourse at all for having the picture taken out of their database. If these giants want to keep enforcing imaginary property rights for themselves, why the hell do they keep violating those same rights for us? (Google can’t even use the excuse that they’re finding out what music we downloaded!)
June 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I think I’ll bring this issue up with my MP.
It is at the least invasion of privacy.
If google gave me $$ every time my house was viewed I might be ok with it, but they are greedy bastards that plan on ruling the world.
June 16th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Who cares? This is a total low for p2pnet. It’s a public street. If it was anyone else you wouldn’t even care but because it’s google everyone is jumping up and down. Move onto more important things.
June 16th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
@ Bios Element.
Isn’t invasion of privacy, even on a public street, an important issue? I’m one of those people who will jump up and down and make a lot of noise when ’smoogle,’ or any entity for that matter, deems my right to privacy can be impuned upon for their own $ making profit. To give you an idea how invasive ’smoogle’ has become, think about this: everytime you log on to www, they’re right behind you tracking every move, every link, every page you visit; they retain the info they plucked from your surfing habits to impose unwanted ads to me, you, and everyone else. They sell your surfing habits just like they are now going to start selling away your right to privacy.
Imagine this, for thought: what if I came into the privacy of your yard, home, bedroom, and started snooping around and taking photos of your most private and personal activities and I turned around and sold that information about you to anyone who would pay me the $ to see into your private affairs? Wouldn’t you think that was a “low blow” of me to do that to you? Wouldn’t you care? Wouldn’t you be jumping up and down in righteous anger at my invasion of your privacy? Wouldn’t you consider your right to privacy, whether in your home, out on the public street, on the net, one of the “more important things?”
June 16th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
In many countries, taking photographs of police stations, military bases, and border crossings was likely to get you arrested, and possibly even shot.
June 16th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Whether or not Street View actually qualifies as “invasion of privacy”, I still object to the “assumption” demonstrated by Google that we should be automatically okay with it all.
There was no public polling, or consultation with any local governments done before launching Street View. They just rolled out the CamCars and starting snappin’.
June 17th, 2009 at 6:28 am
Whether or not Street View actually qualifies as “invasion of privacy”, I still object to the “assumption” demonstrated by Google that we should be automatically okay with it all.
There was no public polling, or consultation with any local governments done before launching Street View. They just rolled out the CamCars and starting snappin’.
Oops…forgot to say great post! Looking forward to your next one.
June 17th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
@Jon:
I could be completely wrong, but I’m beginning to think these spams (like the post above) are being inadvertently enabled by the Google Ad mechanism, based on some of the links I’ve seen attached to them.
June 17th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Jakykong: How is anyone any more likely to use Street View to “scope out” your house than just get in their own car and drive past it? What is the difference? Either way, you wouldn’t know. Do you think potential burglars drive around in ratty old vans with “Potential Burglars” spray painted on the side, to alert you?
I think everybody needs to get over the idea that they’re being targeted. Nobody cares about your house, and the world shouldn’t be deprived of a potentially useful tool just because you don’t want anyone else to see your PUBLICLY VISIBLE property.
I’ll also echo the Reader’s Write above: “I hope you got permission to photograph that house across the street.”
June 17th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Come on get over it. Only people from the island would be making a fuss about this. This is on public streets.
Why don’t you look at canpages.ca which has street view. We haven’t been hearing any bitches about peoples houses being shown in it.
June 17th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
^^ & RadialSkid:
Google just loves guys like you.
Cheers!
June 17th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Because I defend one piece of technology that they produce?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for sticking it to the RIAA, the MPAA, and any other AA. That’s why I visit p2pnet. But the ranting about something just because Google does it just seems like an immature rejection everything corporate just to “fight the man.”
June 18th, 2009 at 2:44 am
@Radial:
“…the ranting about something just because Google does it just seems like an immature rejection everything corporate just to ‘fight the man.’ ”
That pretty effectively says you think anyone that has an issue with Street View is just being immature.
Just because you don’t necessarily share the same concern, doesn’t mean you’re not the one missing the point.
I don’t particularly care WHO wants to point a camera at my house, or for what reason…
What I do care about is, whoever that may be, had better damned-well talk to ME about it first!
Just because something is “accessible” to the naked eye, doesn’t give everyone an automatic privilege to just arbitrarily “capture it” for the World to see. There are often things not normally seen by the naked eye that become visible because of the capture, moreso now that everyone has a computer. That’s why we have privacy laws that trump unlawful or unnecessary surveillance. This goes especially for those that intend to profit from such actions by using the product commercially.
This isn’t necessarily “about Google”.
It’s about the countless things corporations seem to be engaging in these days, for their own benefit only, that simply invade everyone’s privacy without so much as a nod in our direction to make sure we’re okay with what they’re doing.
June 18th, 2009 at 10:21 am
if you people are this scared about your privacy try moving to the mountains. nobody will bother you there. this is no different between this and me going around with a video camera and filming the entire city.
images of your home are in the public domain. unless you obviously copyrighted it. did you?
June 18th, 2009 at 11:54 am
“images of your home are in the public domain”
Clueless!
Images of YOUR home are “public domain” when and if YOU ALLOW IT.
Same goes for photos of yourself. If you outrightly deny photographers a snap, and they do it anyway, you can subpoena the film/card. If they use the shot in anything publicly viewable, you can sue them.
That’s why Google felt the need to say they will delete any archived images requested. Because they already KNOW they’ve crossed a line, and are doing their “customary sidestep” to try to avoid mass objection.
It’s not about “the image”.
It’s about PRIVACY, which is still a governing factor in defining a public domain. Google certainly knows this, and just figured it was somehow immune to the rule, as Google seems to do alot these days.
_______________
“this is no different between this and me going around with a video camera and filming the entire city”
Sure, you can point your camera where you like.
But, some people (myself included) can and will demand to know what you’re doing as you carelessly record their properties or their activities. Given the right surroundings, you may find yourself embroiled in time-consuming exercise, as you could end up being asked to explain to some what your intentions are, or to delete what you’ve recorded of each of their lives, and prove that fact…. or they will (rightly) charge you!
June 19th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
“if you people are this scared about your privacy try moving to the mountains. nobody will bother you there”
You did read the part that described where Jon lives…?
(Guess not.)