Google's Street View Meets Resistance In France

Ian Lamont writes "Google has begun to scan the streets of Paris as part of its Street View service, but the company may be hindered from publishing them unedited. The reason? French privacy laws. Google may be forced to blur faces or use low-resolution versions of the photographs. The Embassy of France in the US has a page devoted to French privacy laws, that says the laws are needed to 'avoid infringing the individual's right to privacy and right to his or her picture (photograph or drawing), both of them rights of personality.'"

The whole Street View idea...

[amccaf1]

I've looked around for information before, but have never found any. Does anyone know how often people actually use the Street View for the purpose for which it was designed (i.e. non-voyeuristic purposes)?

Personally, I just don't see the overwhelming need for it. I've never really needed to see what a road or a street looks like before driving on it. The only case that springs to mind is for odd places way out in remote areas, where there the lay-out may be different... but that's exactly the sort of place that would never get put into the StreetView system anyway.

So, does anyone find StreetView genuinely useful enough to be worth all the privacy hassle?

Ask Yahoo if they need to obey local laws

[Infonaut]

They lost in the French Nazi auction case [cnn.com], which established the precedent that even big American Internet companies have to abide by national laws. The excuse that the Internet is some sort of separate place, or that national laws have no clout in the Internet Age died right then and there, in 2000.

Re:Easily contourné

[ThePromenader]

Temporarily blocking streets sounds like a plausible solution, but it is at best a difficult one; one blocked street (in a mess of narrow one-way streets) can wreak havoc for circulation, and (street-blocking) deliveries often continue until 9:00 am - when the heavy 'to-work' traffic starts.

The best solution is to run the project, using as many cameras/cars possible, during the month of August - this town is dead then. Save of course for the 'touristy' areas - whose numbers (especially during that month) count a majority of foriegners.

"Providing those details would be inappropriate"

[tmk]

Google Street Maps was not welcome in Australia, too. But the newspaper "The Australian" had an interesting idea: the asked Google for the addresses of the Google managers [news.com.au].

While Google has defended the project, the internet company baulked when The Weekend Australian requested the personal details and addresses of the group's key figures to allow the paper's photographers to take pictures of their homes. "Providing those details would be completely inappropriate," said Google spokesman Rob Shilkin.

Re:Easily contourné

[mrbluze]

Where is the big ethical problem here? I just don't see it.

You don't actually have permission to take photos of any faces in public. It's the same law in other countries. People have to consent to having their picture taken. Of course there is spillage and people unwittingly enter millions of tourist happy-snaps.

But if I take photos with identifiable faces and publish them on my blog or website or whatever, the people who own the faces can claim offense if I didn't ask them first.

Where is the big ethical problem here? I just don't see it.

The big ethical problem is that if there aren't these controls on how your photo/voice/identity is used, then people get exploited.

In many countries, you are not even permitted to photograph the front lawn of someone's private residence, even though it is the 'public face' of his home. Not everybody wants their stuff photographed, thank you very much.

If google was french...

[Anonymous Coward]

pagesjaunes (the french yellow pages site) already does streetview (and has done for about 4 or 5 years now).

Maybe it's because google isn't french...

Re:Easily contourné

[Serious Callers Only]

You're also wrong in the UK, the US, Australia and most other countries I can think of, unless by 'claim offence' you mean they can claim they were offended rather than seek legal remedy. What sources exactly have you based your opinion on?

Here's a few of links explaining the situation in the UK, Australia and US for photography of people in public places :

UK [sirimo.co.uk]
US [krages.com]
Australia [4020.net]

Re:The whole Street View idea...

[xaxa]

I don't know about the USA, but in the UK when you get a phone line you're asked if you want to be in the directory.

It's just a stupid pun

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's just another stupid headline pun based on the cliche of the French Resistance. Don't try to take it too literally.

Re:that may not mean what you think

[SerpentMage]

No here is the item:

2. By taking, recording or transmitting, without his or her consent, the picture of a person who is in a private place.

When you take pictures on the street of somebody in a window of their house that is considered private. Google does that and hence is violating the law.