Pittsburgh Couple Sues Google Over Photos Of Their House

from the that-sounds-familiar... dept

Fri, Apr 4th 2008 5:02pm — Mike Masnick

The term "the Streisand Effect" was coined back in 2005 in reference to Barbara Streisand's decision in 2003 to sue an aerial photographer who, in the process of photographing the entire west coast from a helicopter, took a photo of her house. Not only did she lose the case (and have to pay lawyers' fees), the photo of her house, that no one had paid any attention to, got a ton of traffic. If she had any claim at all (which she really didn't), it would have to do with her being a public figure. However, the situation is even more ridiculous when you're dealing with non-public figures.

Yet, here we are in a nearly identical story. Aaron and Christine Boring are a couple who live in Pittsburgh and apparently have freaked out that Google's "Street View" offering includes a photo of their home. In fact, they've sued Google claiming that the photos of their home violate their privacy and "devalue" the property. They also claim that it was trespassing because there was a clear sign saying that the road was a private road. Of course, as the AP article notes, most of the info is already public, including photos of the house which are available on the The Allegheny County real estate Web site. Of course, looking over the sets of photos, it looks as though the Google street view team may have driven up the couple's driveway a bit, which perhaps (just slightly) explains the complaint. Still, Google says that if anyone wants photos of their property removed, they just need to ask Google and prove that they own the property in question. No lawsuit needed. In the meantime, of course, just as with Streisand, the Google photos of the Borings' house are now widely available and getting a lot more attention. Apparently, the Borings don't listen to NPR.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: house, photos, street view, streisand effect
Companies: google

42 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Cynic, 4 Apr 2008 @ 5:52pm

Now this is priceless, especially when you consider their last name. If the date didn't say Fri, Apr 4th I'd think it was an April Fool's gag, but more is the pity, since apparently they are serious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
zhenchyld, 4 Apr 2008 @ 5:53pm

nice
a one bedroom dump with two garages and a swimming pool on a little bit of land. that's exactly what a bachelor like me needs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Charlie, 4 Apr 2008 @ 6:03pm

4 bedrooms and 964 square feet. Thats small for a 4 bedroom. Life in that house must be boring.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- slimcat (profile), 5 Apr 2008 @ 1:18pm
  
  No Kidding!
  The detached garage of my last house was nearly that big.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Randy, 4 Apr 2008 @ 6:13pm

Anyone consider this:
Maybe since the pictures of the house are already on a real estate web site, they want "the Streisand Effect" to happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eric the Grey, 4 Apr 2008 @ 6:26pm

Looks to me...
Looks to me like the best they could hope for is a trespassing charge on the driver of the van. He drove up what appears to be their driveway, the apparent "private road" in the complaint.

EtG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vincent Clement, 4 Apr 2008 @ 9:51pm
  
  Re: Looks to me...
  And that is a slim hope at best.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mttnry, 4 Apr 2008 @ 7:58pm

ha
heres what I think probably happened-
"hey, check out this cool google street view thing."
"wow, neat thats really cool look up our house."
"dag, you can even see the pool good work google."
"Huh google has a lot of money I bet we could sue them and get some for ourselves"...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chris, 4 Apr 2008 @ 8:47pm
  
  Re: ha
  The private property sign was probably placed after they noticed they were on "google streets", ill attempt at some fame and money, truly the "New" American way to the "American Dream". I love my country.. I dislike alot of my countrymen!
  
  Am I cynical?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - laughingman, 4 Apr 2008 @ 9:25pm
    
    Re: Re: ha
    very possible
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom, 4 Apr 2008 @ 9:43pm

he he ha ha
I wonder if they want the money from google to plant some frickin grass...landscaping looks horrible not to mention what the hell are the two garages for?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2008 @ 5:19am
  
  Re: he he ha ha
  > what the hell are the two garages for?
  
  Killdozer?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2008 @ 7:30pm
  
  Re: he he ha ha
  In that shak they're probably growin the grass inside
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Todd, 4 Apr 2008 @ 10:12pm

I don't think they have to worry too much about "devaluing" their property. Looks pretty worthless already. What a dive. I mean, a "private road" leading up to that shack?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
um, 5 Apr 2008 @ 5:16am

their legal brief was boring. oh, they're 'boring' too. figures.

as for their property, it looks like painted cardboard framed in with the cheapest wood they could find. i'd love to see the video of the drive onto their property. was there a sign there then?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2008 @ 7:10am

devalue their property???? that place is a dump, the pool cost more than the house is worth.

They haven't watered their yard in years, probably make meth in the those detached garages
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
El Kabong, 5 Apr 2008 @ 7:18am

Devalue
Why would anybody build those pasteboard shacks around a pool? Why would a chicken ranch have a pool anyway? What's the big secret? Anybody who's interested in buying the property is going to see it sooner or later, and there goes the sale, because nobody would buy that dump. How Boring!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2008 @ 7:42am

I looked at the streetview myself and there is no "Private Drive", No Trespassing, nothing on the entire gravel road.

BTW, the images of their house have been removed from Google
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 5 Apr 2008 @ 7:59am

Boring
I think they got what they wanted; a moment of fame and the widest possible exposure to the real estate market.
The real problem is playing into their hands by printing such nonsense.
Of course, the better stuff to write about is controlled by the media, which is controlled by the "right wing" (should be the "wrong wing"). That we won't hear about (like, how the
"surge" didn't really work; it was just manipulated to look that way).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Triatomic Tortoise, 5 Apr 2008 @ 2:17pm
  
  Re: Boring
  "a moment of fame"?
  
  No way. They are jerks.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Annonymous Predator, 5 Apr 2008 @ 8:24am

The reason behind the lawsuit...
Yes, It's a dumpster - dingy, dirty, there is not even any decent looking grass. Someone pointed out the specs I belive they said - 945sq ft. 4 bedroom? Give it a break I lived in a 1 bedroom 700sq ft apartment when I lived in AZ.

Anyway... The lawsuit - which is taking place in... COMMONWEALTH of PENNSYLVANIA... Rather than asking that the pictures be removed - they will claim that their rights had been violated - and further this with emotional distress - because Google did not remove the picture! We'll just ignore the part about "requesting that Google remove these pics would effortlessly have resolved the problem...

Instead we'll file the lawsuit - and then CLAIM that they ignored our request for the removal... As we've seen soooooo many times on Judge Mathis... Where is the proof that you requested this... Uh-oh-Uh... I thought I had it but - I must of left it back at the shack where I sleep with my sister... Oops - did I say that out loud...

Ok - I'm wasting time with this crap - more time than should have been spent on this... Maybe we should file suit against these people for waisting our time with their DUMP!

Now I must drop a load to lighten up this BORING - blog!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
shanwharmon, 5 Apr 2008 @ 8:49am

privacy shivevacy
privacy was their concern so going public and having their name, address, and nearly every other detail of their life reported in most major news outlets is conistent with their desire for privacy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bill, 5 Apr 2008 @ 8:52am

They're clearly retarded and deserve to be seperated from theior money through lawyer's fees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jester, 5 Apr 2008 @ 1:50pm

So fitting
You can see why the occupants are suing. They need money to finish their remodeling of the pile of crap they call a house. When people who HAVE no money, and if lived in the south would be called white trash, sue big companies in hopes of getting money it's just sad.

Desperation is a stinky cologne. -Super Troopers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
D. Rivers, 5 Apr 2008 @ 3:08pm

Boring's house
This is colossally boring!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steven, 5 Apr 2008 @ 6:06pm

Excuse me?
I'm sorry, but I fail to see any value to this property, so devaluing it would be impossable.

And did I miss something? I can't seem to find the sign that says it's private property.

No wonder why they are suing, they have no money! To bad they had to choose Google to go up against, they're screwed.

"No really, my real estate agent told me that this was a 5 star home that is then envy of the neighborhood!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BTR1701, 5 Apr 2008 @ 8:30pm

Amazing
I think I'd be a little peeved also (but not to the point of filing a lawsuit) if some guy from Google showed up and started photographing my home and trespassing on my property to do it. The underlying arrogance of that company is amazing. They act like everything is fair game for them to put on the internet and if they have to violate a copyright or trespass on someone's property to do it, well then so be it.

If I caught them doing this to me (and given the layout of my property, they'd have to do more than come up my driveway "a little bit" to photograph my home), I wouldn't sue them but the Google cameraman might get a little ass-kickin' for his trouble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rose M. Welch, 5 Apr 2008 @ 9:17pm

I'm from the South and...
...if people showed up in my long private driveway, they might get shot. And I wouldn't be breaking any laws, either.

Google very clearly violated their privacy, although I think the home devaluation claim is fluff. Although I detest the lack of Internet privacy, I accept it, esp. because I can choose to not put private information on the Internet. But when people bring that lack of respect to my home, I will sue you... But only if the shots miss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sailbum, 6 Apr 2008 @ 12:55am

Thank g-d the Google camera man was not in Louisiana; he would have come out of it with a load of buckshot in his backside at best or left feet first in a box at worst. They do not take kindly to trespassers down in the bayou! In any case, this suit is a little rediculous. I do not see how they could prove any damages from having their POS house photographed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CRS, 6 Apr 2008 @ 7:37am

Privacy?
Look, it appears that clearly these folks are simply trying
to dig into the deep pockets of Google. Look at their property then read their claim. They claim emotional stress? Whatever emotional stress they are under it's due to other issues. Their property looks abandoned anyway....They should be prosecuted for this frivolous lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
garrick, 6 Apr 2008 @ 8:40am

"Barbara Streisand"
Barbra Streisand, not Barbara.

Silly lawsuits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mojo, 6 Apr 2008 @ 12:23pm

typical of frivilous suits....claim emotional distress....and it6 was caused by property devalue. have they checked the NATIONWIDE trend with property values....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous jerk, 6 Apr 2008 @ 5:50pm

Pictures have been taken down from Google
As of just now!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jay, 6 Apr 2008 @ 7:57pm

Seriously?
I've got some news for the Borings...

Google isn't to be blamed for their depreciating property value it is a lethal combination of a poor housing market and a HORRIBLE lawn! Get off Google's back, and put your time into putting some grass seed down. Not to mention the fact that there is a wooden board covering their front door without a stoop or step of any kind. Get over yourselves, if anyone wants to buy your ranch, they are going to go through a Realtor, not Google maps.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
paul, 6 Apr 2008 @ 10:19pm

i would be mad
yeah the value stuff is fluff. but look at the pictures the camera man had to drive practically to the end of the drive way to get the picture of the pool.

I don't see where that has any public value. House aside. He went to far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Apr 2008 @ 7:43am

So Google goes to the trouble of sending out vans to photograph things but it is up to the homeowner to request the pictures to come down?

Thats kind of like being a shoplifter walking out with stuff and then claiming that he would have gladly paid for it had he been asked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 7 Apr 2008 @ 9:39am
  
  Re:
  So Google goes to the trouble of sending out vans to photograph things but it is up to the homeowner to request the pictures to come down? Thats kind of like being a shoplifter walking out with stuff and then claiming that he would have gladly paid for it had he been asked.
  
  Except, that no, you're entirely wrong. Taking a photo of property is not illegal (it's not "shoplifting"). So, it's perfectly legal to put it up. In fact, there's no requirement that they should then have to take it down. Google doing so is because the company is being nice, not through some sort of legal reason.
  
  So, you're basically 100% wrong on your analogy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
didn't anyone notice why, 7 Apr 2008 @ 11:04am

they might be so mad. Take a look at what the county assessors' office says is on the property compared to what they actually have. Me thinks their property taxes are about to go up. Maybe that is why they are trying to sue Google.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Apr 2008 @ 6:18pm

So tresspassing isn't illegal Mike? I think it is so you are entirely wrong.

Nice? I think not. So basically you are 100% wrong in your post, you dick. FU and have a good day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 8 Apr 2008 @ 1:09am
  
  Re:
  So tresspassing isn't illegal Mike? I think it is so you are entirely wrong.
  
  Er... you should try reading a bit before making such incorrect statements. The original comment was about Google just sending out regular photographing vehicles, which had *nothing* to do with trespassing. Almost all of the street view photos are taken from the street.
  
  Whether or not this is trespassing is a separate issue than the comment I was responding to.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
sandy, 20 Apr 2008 @ 7:40pm

they sound like a couple of "Pittsburgh rednecks" to me
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2008 @ 7:00am

They are probably just embarrassed that people will be able to see the dump they live in. Why would they have wasted their money on that shack? They are just a couple of free loading weirdos looking to get some quick money from a law suit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]