Comments on: Google Streetview Arrives in Cambridge

By: Richard

Richard — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:33:51 +0000

Interestingly the blacked out Thompson’s lane image has now been replaced with a new photograph, taken slightly closer to Bridge Street than the one which was removed.

I preferred the blacked out version - at least then you can see what’s being censored!

By: John Lawton

John Lawton — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:46:42 +0000

Chris wrote “I do not object to the right to photograph - what I object to is the publication worldwide of unauthorised photographs for commercial purposes - there is no altruistic motive in Google’s latest product.”

Authorised? By whom? That’s the whole point, you shouldn’t need authorisation to take photographs.

By: Chris Humphris

Chris Humphris — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:52:46 +0000

We will have to agree to differ!

News reporting is one thing but I do not think that you can compare Google Streetview with news copy……..

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:38:19 +0000

The description: “publication worldwide of unauthorised photographs for commercial purposes” would cover publishing photographs showing the manner in which demonstrations are policed in a newspaper.

While neither the newspaper or Google are altruistic, they do both in my view provide a very useful service.

By: Chris Humphris

Chris Humphris — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:30:22 +0000

I do not object to the right to photograph - what I object to is the publication worldwide of unauthorised photographs for commercial purposes - there is no altruistic motive in Google’s latest product.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:51:14 +0000

I do not see a problem with taking photographs of anything which occurs in public, or can be seen from a public road. (With a few exceptions as laid down in law).

I am very concerned about the erosion of this freedom to take photographs in public places, both through the overzealous actions of the police acting on their own “initiative” to stop people photographing antisocial behaviour or things like motorways, busses and trains. I am very concerned about the counter terrorism act 2008 which makes it illegal to photograph a police officer, this would, if obeyed and enforced, prevent both media organisations and individuals reporting on instances when the police behave inappropriately.

We don’t know what happened with respect to the old vicarage photo, we don’t know anyone asked it to be removed. Photographs from similar angles can be seen via the link to the details of the house for sale, the only difference being on those a major tree is still in-situ.

Downing Street has been removed from Google Streetview, perhaps following a request from a resident. I think it would be a positive thing if in response more people took photographs of the omitted scene and posted them online to show that ridiculous censorship cannot work, and in-fact often has the effect of giving more attention to something which would otherwise have gone unnoticed.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/9457544@N08/3376829828/

By: Chris Humphris

Chris Humphris — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:58:28 +0000

Richard - you are in danger of losing your credibility. Is it jealousy or naivety that drives you to support this intrusion into people’s lives or question their desire for privacy?
Your previous topics have led to genuine discussion but this, I fear, is a step too far.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:29:59 +0000

A set of photos from Thompson's lane in Cambridge has (as of the time of writing) been removed from Google streetview:
View Larger Map This photo set would I believe have included a view of the garden of the old vicarage. I have taken my own photo of what is missing: I wonder what may have been going on in that garden which prompted a request to Google for the removal of the image. Tree felling is one possibility or perhaps the owners are simply trying to keep their hidden gem of a house and garden out of the public eye. In an arrangement coming to an end this month the garden is leased to the owners of the house from the church for £5/year. The house is currently for sale for £925,000.

By: Chris Humphris

Chris Humphris — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:26:14 +0000

I suppose this is just the same as driving round in a car - but how about (out of town) thieves sizing up potentially prosperous areas? It’s the thought that anyone in the world can drive round my town and nose round.
A snoopers’ dream come true.

By: John Lawton

John Lawton — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:19:51 +0000

Google have undertaken to ’smear’ people’s faces to make them undecognisable, but I am on three pictures in Maid’s Causeway, and am fairly recognisable. Still, in my view it is a brilliant resource, and I am much more worried over the government ‘database state’ then this.

http://tinyurl.com/cpup2s

By: Chris Humphris

Chris Humphris — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:05:53 +0000

Now this is really scary - never mind ID cards. Whatever happened to privacy?