In April of 2008, a privacy lawsuit was filed against one of the largest Internet search engine players, Google Inc. Aaron and Christine Boring of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania took legal action after images of their home were posted on Google’s free Internet mapping program, called Google Maps.
The Boring’s claimed that Google caused them “mental suffering” and that their actions decreased the value of their home. They accused Google of privacy violation, negligence, trespassing, and unjust enrichment.
The photographs for Google Maps are taken by the Google Street View Car, which uses 360-degree cameras and GPS to give a street level view of the world’s cities, towns and neighborhoods. The Boring’s street is labeled as a private road, but that didn’t stop the Google Street team from snapping pictures. Photographs at the end of the couple’s driveway were taken, from where the house, detached garage and pool area could be seen.However, on February 17 of this year, US Magistrate Judge Amy Reynolds Hay dismissed the lawsuit, per Google’s request, and ruled that the plaintiffs had “failed to state a claim under any count.” The Borings were seeking $25,000 in compensatory and punitive damages from Google, in addition to the removal of the images of their house from Google’s Street View program. Although Google did take down the photos of the Boring’s home, the US District Court in Pittsburgh rejected the Boring’s request 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," Judge Hay commented.
Google has replied to the outcome of the lawsuit, saying that it is pleased with the ruling. A Google spokeswoman said that the company thought the lawsuit lacked merit, and that Google holds the utmost respect for individual’s privacy. “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.”
Personally, I think this was a poorly planned stunt. Anyone who wants to take an Internet giant like Google to court is looking for money. First of all, $25,000 in damages is pocket change for Google. I’m guessing they figured that Google wouldn’t want to bother going to court and would shell out the money in an attempt to settle the case quickly and quietly. Borings—Helloooooooo?! What are you thinking?? You don’t think Google has an entire legal department dedicated to beating people like you off with a stick? Good plan.
Secondly, as a comment posted on one of the articles I referred to states, the constitution doesn’t guarantee the right to privacy. Amendment 4 (Privacy of the Person and Possessions) states: "The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
And lastly, seriously Borings? Really…if you wanted your 15 minutes of fame, you could have come up with something a little better than this. Congratulations, you are now the laughing stock of the Internet for one whole week.
Personally, I think this was a poorly planned stunt. Anyone who wants to take an Internet giant like Google to court is looking for money. First of all, $25,000 in damages is pocket change for Google. I’m guessing they figured that Google wouldn’t want to bother going to court and would shell out the money in an attempt to settle the case quickly and quietly. Borings—Helloooooooo?! What are you thinking?? You don’t think Google has an entire legal department dedicated to beating people like you off with a stick? Good plan.Secondly, as a comment posted on one of the articles I referred to states, the constitution doesn’t guarantee the right to privacy. Amendment 4 (Privacy of the Person and Possessions) states: "The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
And lastly, seriously Borings? Really…if you wanted your 15 minutes of fame, you could have come up with something a little better than this. Congratulations, you are now the laughing stock of the Internet for one whole week.
