Well, there are so many other examples to breaches in people´s privacy. Some of the paparazis could pretty well be in jail if they did not hide behind certain so-called freedoms. The tragic death of Princess Diana is one such example. I know some celebreties are voluntarily giving out their make believe personal secrets to those sharks but as a whole to what extend the whole paparazzi business must be considered in the framework of people´s right to be informed is a question mark.
As for Google publishing photographs of streets, there seems to be no legal restrictions applying here. It is perfectly legal to take pictures of people in their natural environments. Otherwise, neither movies nor documentaries could be shot since common people are invariably pictured while they are doing their daily tasks. It is indeed bad luck for a married person to be pictured say with his girl friend in a box office smash hit. Whether it would be a spoiler or a a revelation is another subject.
I think some of those paoarazis should be in jail for harassment. Can anyone who is not a subject of their "hunt" imagine how victimized someone like Diana was?
Good points, it is an interesting prospect. With Google you can put in an address and take a look at it, zoom in, get different views from other angles. It certainly facilitates stalking. I can attest to the fact that Google´s actual address information is not correct, as I checked a few places I know and they had it off....close...but off.
I know people who had high fences to keep viewers out, but with Google Street View, you can get a view through the fence via a few small spaces. Maybe people will start building more effective fences....and start wearing chadors....
Edited (6/8/2009) by alameda
[add]
|