Comments for Google's Street View Challenged in the UK

Google's Street View Challenged in the UK

2008-07-04T16:33:45Z

Google's Street View launched in the US last May, but expanding the service to Europe is proving to be a bit more difficult for Google. The Google Maps blog today announced the release of Street View for the route of the Tour de France, but privacy activists in England are anything but amused by the prospect of Google starting to photograph the streets of London.

]]> England's Privacy International doesn't trust in Google's ability to automatically blur faces. While in the US, photographing people in the street is absolutely legal without the need to ask for consent, in the UK, anyone who appears in a photo that is used commercially has to grant consent. Google is rumored to have started taking pictures in the UK this week.

However, Google's experiment with its face blurring technology in New York shows that they are quite capable of employing this technology. Google already blurs all license plate numbers in Street View as well.

This is, of course, a week where Google's privacy policies have been in the news almost every single day (and where Google finally put its privacy policy on its front page). After losing the private data of quite a few of its employees and being forced to release the records of its YouTube users to Viacom, Google was probably hoping to make the news today by having a little Uncle Sam in Street View to celebrate the 4th of July and by releasing Street View for the route of the Tour de France (after all, this is the first European appearance of Street View).

Comment from Mapper99 on 2008-07-04

2008-07-04T19:23:36Z

There are already some privacy invasiosn rolling in from Google Street View France:

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com

Comment from Scot on 2008-07-04

2008-07-04T19:28:02Z

in the UK, anyone who appears in a photo that is used commercially has to grant consent

That's flat out wrong. From the "UK Photographers Rights" PDF -

The lack of any coherent law of privacy in the UK
means that photographers are not only free to take
photographs of people in public places, but they
can use those photos as they wish, including for
commercial gain.

That Photographer Rights guide was written by "Linda Macpherson LL.B, Dip.L.P., LL.M, who is a lecturer in law at Heriot Watt University, with particular experience in Information Technology Law, Intellectual Property Law and Media Law."

Comment from Keir Clarke on 2008-07-04

2008-07-04T20:08:04Z

"in the UK, anyone who appears in a photo that is used commercially has to grant consent."

Someone should tell the BBC and all the other media players in the UK as well. Every day newspapers print photos showing the faces of passers-by and TV shows the faces of the public at sports events, on the news etc.

Why is nobody shouting privacy at them?

Comment from Scot on 2008-07-04

2008-07-04T20:10:28Z

Mr Davies of Privacy International (who made the dubious comments about the need for consent for the commercial use of images) also has a belief about the Information Commissioner's powers that can best be described as being grounded in fantasy -

"Mr Davies said it would write to the Information Commissioner seeking a suspension of the service in the UK.

I take it Mr Davies hasn't visited the Information Commissioner's website to see what it is they actually do. They don't go around stopping services. Assuming they decided to look at Streetview (which is far from certain) and then found something objectionable (which is very uncertain) they would do their best to work with Google to bring the service into line with the law.

Comment from malachi on 2008-07-04

2008-07-04T20:12:04Z

So about 4 million live video surveillance cameras in the UK are fine, but don't take any photographs.

I must be missing something.

Comment from Frederic Lardinois on 2008-07-04

2008-07-04T21:33:18Z

Scot - The way I interpreted this was that the press is treated differently in this context (I think I have mostly read about this in the context of paparazzi stalking celebrities).

Also , the Telegraph has some more depth in its reporting than the original BBC piece: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2008/04/03/dlgoogle103.xml

Comment from hockeyshooter on 2008-07-06

2008-07-06T12:35:49Z

Commercial use (as in potentially endorsing a product) and editorial use are not the same thing. If you read legal cases brought by celebrities against magazines, the magazine usually uses the defence that it was "in the public interest" that the photos could be shown. That defence could not be used if you snapped someone in the street, then made up an advert from the photo suggesting they used or recommended a particular product. I'm not saying that it is "illegal" per se, just that you wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court.

Comment from Fred on 2008-07-07

2008-07-07T09:29:43Z

Cheers to the UK laws. Privacy 1 Google 0.

Comment from Mark Harrison on 2008-07-07

2008-07-07T13:16:50Z

Keir,

The CCTV Cameras are subtly different. There is a requirement in UK law to put up a notice explaining that you are operating CCTV, and give the name, address and telephone number of the "data controller."

Just driving around and taking photos is OK for personal use, and when it is "in the public interest", but NOT for commercial use unless a "public interest" case can be made before a court.

Scot,

In the UK, you have a legal right to request any information stored about yourself, including pictures. The obligation is then on the COMPANY HOLDING THE INFORMATION to dig it out, and the maximum they may charge for you doing so is £10, irrespective of how much time it takes.

The Information Commissioner has, as I understand things, interpreted this to mean "including pictures." Therefore, ANY UK citizen can send Google a tenner, and ask for copies of all the pictures they have... and it's up to Google to provide them all :-) This is one reason most CCTV pictures are only held for a limited period of time - so that, in the event of an issue, there's not much to check!

If a company fails to do so on a consistent basis, then the Information Commissioner can bring legal action up to and including requesting the courts to shut down companies.

Comment from hughmac on 2008-07-07

2008-07-07T18:31:56Z

elements of the uk data protection act are now in play and depending on the circumstances involved, it can be illegal to print photos without permission,

Comment from Otto Studen on 2008-07-09

2008-07-09T13:36:12Z

Street View is a good idea!!! I'd recommend you to look through another resource. My favourite is Street View service on http://streetview.fizber.com/