Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

You can't be camera shy now..

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 17 July 2008
IT looks fairly innocent if a little odd, but Google's unmistakable camera cars have been causing a bit of a stir on the streets of Edinburgh.
The 360-degree camera cars are in the course of filming every street in the Capital preparing a virtual map of the city.

The aim is to provide a walk-through picture of Edinburgh on the internet. Users would be able to guide themselves along any c
ity street, as if they were exploring it in 3D, homing in on anything or anyone who took their interest.

You could, for example, type in "108 Holyrood Road, Edinburgh" and be virtually transported to the front door of the Evening News' offices.

Google has promised to blur the faces of anybody it captures during the course of filming images for its Street View service.

In the face of privacy concerns, it has also included an opt-out for anyone who objects to their property appearing on the Google site, although the onus is on the property owner to complain.

The company has also admitted that the technology "isn't perfect" and "will sometime miss a face or licence plate if they are partially covered or at a difficult angle".

"Google spotters" have inundated the News with camera car sightings since we first reported on the project last week, and the car has been seen on streets from Morningside to Leith.

One resident of a quiet cul-de-sac took great exception, trying to obstruct the camera to prevent it filming her property.

Rewa Banks, 62, found the car photographing her front door in Warriston, and challenged the driver.

She said: "I went up to him and asked him what possible interest anyone could have in spying up my street unless they were up to mischief. I stood in front of my garden and held my hands up so he couldn't film any more – and if they want to use my picture they'll have to pay me for it!

"The last thing I want to be doing is advertising my property to thieves and burglars so I told him to stop filming because he was invading my privacy.

"He just shrugged his shoulders and said he was only doing his job. I asked him who I could complain to and he took my details and said Google would get back to me in writing."

Unsatisfied, Mrs Banks immediately contacted her local councillor, Iain Whyte, to see if he could do anything to safeguard her privacy.

Councillor Whyte said: "I'm not sure there's very much we can do about it. People have generally always been allowed to film what they like in the street."

The city council says it has no power to stop the filming unless the vehicle is blocking the road or causing an obstruction.

Mrs Banks has nevertheless contacted the Office of the Information Commissioner (ICO) in Scotland, in Thistle Street, which has already received other complaints.

Among the other objectors is Edinburgh-based civil liberties campaigner John Welford, from the NO2ID campaign.

Mr Welford said that he fears the filming "could be extremely dangerous for a person on a witness protection programme or trying to hide from a violent partner".

The ICO said it is taking up the complaints with Google, and is urging the company to "seriously consider the implications for individuals' privacy before introducing Street View to the UK".

An ICO spokesman added: "Whilst we recognise the benefits of such a service, there is a risk that Street View could identify individuals alongside their place of work or places they are visiting.

"In most instances this will not have a serious impact on people's privacy. However, identifying an individual outside some premises, for instance health clinics and hospitals, could raise serious privacy issues."

Google says it has safeguards in place, with a spokesman saying: "We make it easy within the product for users to report a face or licence plate for extra blurring, or to ask for their image to be removed.

"We think this type of privacy-enabling technology is the best way of meeting the challenge of continuing to respect people's expectation of privacy, while not stifling the development of new products and services that everyone can enjoy and benefit from."

The spokesman added: "We are taking photographs to bring the Street View product to Europe.

"Edinburgh may be one of the cities included when we launch Street View in Europe."





The full article contains 745 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 17 July 2008 11:36 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Privacy laws
 
1

Amenemhat,

17/07/2008 12:30:36
what invasion of privacy, stupid woman, your in the street, wear a hoody

I take it the evening news wants all tourist cameras confiscated.
2

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 12:43:11

Google Car to replace trams?
3

Jenny MacArthur,

17/07/2008 12:43:50
I'm normally against the headlong rush to destroy our privacy by things like the government's obsession with ID databases which are fast turning us into a police state with massive potential for abuse (and if it can be abused, it will be). But hey, this is public space. I see no problem.
4

20something,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 12:52:22
Mrs Banks photo will be hilarious I really hope they just put them up to embarass her.
5

It's heading straight for us!,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 12:53:33
"I went up to him and asked him what possible interest anyone could have in spying up my street unless they were up to mischief. I stood in front of my garden and held my hands up so he couldn't film any more – and if they want to use my picture they'll have to pay me for it!"

Mad old bat - If they had run her over that would have been one for the google earth geeks to tag!
6

Feral Youth who make Gorgie Tony's life hell!,

17/07/2008 12:53:50
Cannae wait to see what happens when the Google car goes into the likes of Pennywell Road or Niddrie Mains Road and meets the local youths. Get yer tin hats on guys!
7

,

17/07/2008 13:02:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

john z,

edinburgh 17/07/2008 13:14:49
I would suggest that anybody who appears on the google website sue them for non authorised use of their image/likeness.

In the UK, as in many countries, you may take a picture of anybody you wish, unless asked to stop. But, importantly, what the law does to protect people is it limits what can be done with say a picture of you. Unless you provide consent, explicitly, in writing, your image (which can be identified as you from your face), may not be used for commercial purposes, or any bad purposes like using your image in a terrorist website or porn website. If you sustain damages due to the commercial use of your image, especially where it's use is not authorised by you, you can effectively sue the pants off them.

I would strongly defend the rights of photographers to freely go about their business, as it is a fundamental part of democracy, but this is different, as it is unauthorised filming of people and private property for purely commercial reasons. If you feel they are being intrusive and filming you, ask them to stop. If they do not stop filming you, take their registration and call the police immediately. If you ask any film crew not to film you, if it is upsetting you, then they should stop, otherwise face being charged with a breach of the peace

I believe Google should quite frankly f off with their cameras, as the footage is being used for purely commercial reasons and their methods for ensuring peoples faces do not appear are shoddy, and not fit for purpose. But I'd also suggest anybody with money who is used in their website should take them to the proverbial cleaners in a UK court.

As a passing point, many film cameras have very poor protection against water ingress, and even as much as a cup of water (or a wee drop from a water pistol) can have serious effects, so I'm sure google have taken the appropriate precautions, in our climate.
9

Bob 2,

17/07/2008 13:24:12
must be great footage of edinburgh,

Tramworks
RoadWorks
Gasworks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks
Tramworks
RoadWorks

But none of the Workers at the TRAMWORKS sites, more chance of seeing the Yeti or Lord Lucan
10

Doggonedude,

kennel 17/07/2008 13:26:23
Does anyone know if kennels are included in this scheme?
11

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

17/07/2008 13:29:41
"he took my details and said Google would get back to me in writing"

Wow, I'd have thought that Google would know how to use email by now.
12

Rusty Nut,

dark side of the moon 17/07/2008 13:34:37
"Mr Welford said that he fears the filming "could be extremely dangerous for a person on a witness protection programme or trying to hide from a violent partner"."

Is it just me or are people not getting a shade paranoid about this?
Surely if you were a mob hitman or a violent stalker it would be easier walking through the streets looking at people's unblurred faces than spending hours trawling through a website.

13

Wee Keef,

In the street 17/07/2008 13:35:53
Sorry john z, your argument doesn't work in practice. The STV news has street scenes from our towns and cities every day, and is making money out of the advertisers. What's the difference?

Anyway, you are still outdone by the preposterousness of John W of the NO2ID campaign, as quoted in the article. People on the witness protection programme? Seriously?

'Cause you just know that the mafia now has whole teams of mobsters scouring Google Earth on the off chance of spotting Billy the Squealer.
14

Wee Keef,

17/07/2008 13:37:30
#11 - E-mail is writing
15

Wee Keef,

17/07/2008 13:41:42
FTA - "Mrs Banks immediately contacted her local councillor, Iain Whyte, to see if he could do anything to safeguard her privacy"

That's Mrs Rewa Banks, aged 62, who lives in a main door property with front garden in Warriston. And likes to chat with reporters.

*Sigh*
16

Don't run greetin to me when you break a leg!,

Falkirk 17/07/2008 13:47:46
Among the other objectors is Edinburgh-based civil liberties campaigner John Welford, from the NO2ID campaign.
Mr Welford said that he fears the filming "could be extremely dangerous for a person on a witness protection programme or trying to hide from a violent partner".

What a lot of utter tosh. All you are going to see, on the million to one chance that you happen to be looking on the right street is a picture of an historical event. So unless you own a tardis!

Its pillocks like you who think up ridiculous reasons to object to everything just so that you can be heard, that have got the world in the mess it is.

Civil liberty = Criminals charter.

We all know it, but are not allowed to say it because telling the truth will offend some pond life.

Get a real job you lazy useless tw*t!
17

Mallory,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 13:57:31
I feel happier about Google having a still image which might show me with a blurred face as part of a street scene, than I am for the hours of video-tape and street and personal data continually being obtained by the council, polis, and all the 'organs of the state'.

At least the Google offering is transparent and a one off. Perhaps the Evening News should be asking questions about who, when, where and how access to footage from security and road pricing cameras etc is permitted.

Come to think on it was that a CCTV security camera in your Holyrood Road premises?

Is anyone looking a close up footage of advocates and clients in Parliament Hall?
18

Dragonlord,

17/07/2008 13:58:03
Followed this vehicle along the bypass before a gap allowed me to pass.

The main point is if you take a photo of the parliment building, the police will stop you under anti terrorist laws. But they will allow Google to do the terrorists work for them. This government are trying to frighten everyone with these scare stories of terrorists, but when Google come along nothing is said. If anyone wanted to plan a bombing, they log on to google and everything is done for them. So what is it to be? Tourist being stopped from taking holiday snaps or google filming everything? They can't have it all.
19

La5t_minit,

17/07/2008 14:06:52
#11. She probably doesnt have a PC so doesnt know what Google Earth is about apart from the bad press some Technophobic clowns get in print.

Most people in Edinburgh are captured on CCTV 30-40 times a day without them blinking an eye.

The Google system is fantastic and unless you are completely retarded and a wanna be member of 'The world is against me' brigade, it is yet another useful tool. Those who complain about it obviously dont realise they can be seen far clearer by overhead satellites and CCTV than on a low res 360 panoramic shot from Google and they should immediately retire to their basement and paint over the windows.




20

,

17/07/2008 14:07:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
21

Wee Keef,

17/07/2008 14:12:21
#15 - The police cannot and would not stop you from taking holiday phots of the Parliament building. Any interested terrorist would, in any event, simply look up the photos, guides and floor plans on the internet.

From the Scottish Parliament website:

"Can I take photographs when I visit?

You are welcome to take photographs of the public areas of the building such as the exhibition in the Main Hall. You are also welcome to take photographs of the Debating Chamber from the public galleries when no parliamentary business is taking place.
You are not permitted to film or take photographs during parliamentary business or while you are on a guided tour of the Parliament building."

Scare stories of your own I think.
22

Raoul Duke,

17/07/2008 14:14:19
The wifey needs her head examined. What a fuss about nothing
23

Dragonlord,

17/07/2008 14:26:45
21# I think you meant to reply to 18, However only recently people have been stopped taking photo's, as you would already know if you read the papers. I am not making anything up.In london they are particularly strict. I for one think the government are pulling opur collective chains as the terrorist threat is nowhere near as bad as they claim. Removing our troups from Afghanistan and Iraq would remove this minor threat altogether.
24

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 14:55:03
Sumbdy's takin photies! OMG call the waaaambulance
25

My opinions count for more than yours,

17/07/2008 15:08:36
Look here, you bunch of illiterate tossers:

More than one photo = "photos"

NOT "photo's"

Use "photo's" only when you mean "photo is" (as in "that photo's out of focus") or when you're describing something that belongs to the photo ("I don't like that photo's glossy finish").

Learn the difference, idiots. Photos, photo's. Photo, photo's.

Honestly, how you retards dare to criticise anyone else's opinions when you come across with the IQ of a badger is beyond me.
26

My opinions count for more than yours,

17/07/2008 15:09:07
:)
27

Chris,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 15:15:40
#8 john z: "as a passing point...", what you are inferring could happen would be a breach of the peace, and possibly criminal damage. So, presumably in your eyes, it is fine for one party to breach the peace, but not the other.
28

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 15:55:13
#25

Thank's for that. But its irrelevant to the thread. Away back to your Lynne Truss' book.
29

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 15:56:31
#25 Milnes Bar
30

M33,

17/07/2008 15:57:20
Why did the article have to state that the Information Commissioner's office is in Thistle Street? Now Google know exactly where to flag as priority 1 when in the words of no.18 they "do the terrorists work for them"...
31

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 15:59:13
Should it be

Milnes Bar
Milne's Bar
Milnes's Bar
Bar of Milnes

32

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 16:00:41

Grape's 99p a punnet

"Do all your grapes have apostrophes?"

- "Naw, there's some seedless ones over there"
33

Shorething,

17/07/2008 16:00:57
#8 - have people not anything better to be doing with their time???!!!

They were filming in a public space - no issue....
34

My opinions count for more than yours,

because I'm special 17/07/2008 16:04:04
"Panini's" really gets on my wick, too.

Panini is already plural.
35

adsullata,

PDX 17/07/2008 16:21:26
They did this here in PDX last year and I was quite annoyed with the fact that I could go to the site and not only see where I lived but my car sitting in front also. So I appreciate the concern. Yet nothing has happened. There has been no crime. There are no gawkers and there have been no stalkers. So my annoyance was not warranted.

I do like the fact that if you are looking to purchase a house you can get a good look at the neighborhood before you head over with the realtor to check it out.

Having never been to Scotland and as I don't see myself getting to Scotland in the near future (pity that) I would be one to appreciate a 3D'ish look and what I am missing.

So chin up Mrs. Banks, no one is really that interested.
36

I love to eat Sellotape,

17/07/2008 16:25:17
Except that one woman.
37

Jed Smith,

Moscow 17/07/2008 16:25:39
#34

Spaghetto hoops for tea tonight I reckon.
38

,

17/07/2008 17:12:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
39

Steve-o,

Edinburgh 17/07/2008 17:19:55
#25.

Clearly YOU are the moron:

The apostrophe can legitimately be used to represent missing characters in a contraction. In this case photo's = photoGRAPHs, where the upper-case characters have been replaced by an apostrophe.

Back to school - dork.
40

Map Guy,

Canada 17/07/2008 17:23:29
The new Google Street View imagery from France is high resolution. Couple that with the narrow French streets and you can see right into French bedrooms as seen on this blog:

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com
41

AD in sunny Livingston,

17/07/2008 18:32:05
"...The last thing I want to be doing is advertising my property to thieves and burglars..."

Does she have a big sign outside her front door with an arrow saying, "valuables in here"??!

Daft old sow.
42

stuartyboy,

edinburgh 17/07/2008 19:20:15
Poor old Mrs Banks probably doesn't know who or what
Google is,there is every possibility that she still
has a black and white TV,has never heard of Freeview
nor Sky TV,and there is every possibility that her local
councillor is totally fed up with her complaints over
the years.
43

Ian down under,

Kawerau 17/07/2008 22:07:31
Say cheeeeze.
44

Rv2!,

Skulking about Warriston with my camera van. 17/07/2008 23:00:51
I have to add one thing.

Ha haha ha Ha haha ha Ha haha ha Ha haha ha Ha haha ha!

I'll offer a free bag of salt and vinegar crisps to the first person to find that nutters photo!
I wish it was me with my camera(s) taking photos of her street. Silly woman has NO IDEA about the law.

Google, BRING IT ON!
45

ElmoGal,

18/07/2008 12:00:59
Do we get to have privacy anymore??? does anyone else see what a useful tool this would be to would-be terrorists who didn't know their way about - chilling really.
46

Two Truths,

Edinburgh 18/07/2008 12:49:53
#18 - Myself and others took photographs of a fire performer, spinning fire in the water pools outside the Scottish Parliament building, late one night.

The police did notice us and politely asked what we were doing. We told them what we were doing and they left us to it.

Nobody was arrested, nor accused of being a terrorist.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Are you worried about Google’s ‘Street View’ mapping project?
Yes, it’s an invasion of people’s privacy
No, as long as identity safeguards are in place
No, it will help promote the city to tourists

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.