Simon Fodden predicted [1]that the privacy complaints would begin once Google Maps Street View [2]was launched. The maps have proven popular in Canada, with over 150 million views of other countries [3] by Canadians in 2009 alone.
Google recognizes privacy concerns, but claims to address them through their collection and processing approach:
- public access images, no different than what would normally be seen walking down the street
- not in real time, so images can be months old before going live
- blurring of license plates and faces
- allowing removal requests, through the “Report a Problem” option in the bottom-left of all images
Assistant Privacy Commissioner Elizabeth Denham [4] raised these concerns [5] Thursday to MPs in the House of Commons privacy and ethics committee [6], pointing out that at times Colonel Sanders [7]‘ face was blurred in ads, while people were not.
She said that Google’s collection may fall under an exception of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act [8], 2000, c. 5 (PIPEDA,),
Collection without knowledge or consent
7. (1) …an organization may collect personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual only if
…
(c) the collection is solely for journalistic, artistic or literary purposes;
However, she notes that if other providers use the same argument to start collecting street-level information under the same exception, they might try to disseminate it without blurring technology, thereby posing a risk to children by predators.
Jonathan Lister [9]of Google Canada claimed [10] that they offer more privacy controls than mainstream-media,
If I’m inadvertently captured on the front page of a newspaper, the same way I might be inadvertently captured on Street View, I don’t have the recourse that Google offers if I’m captured in a pan shot on broadcast news. I don’t have my image blurred and I don’t have the ability to have that image taken down. So I think Google is really trying to lead by example and set the industry standard on privacy-protection practice.
Minutes from the meeting are not yet available [11], nor are documents from the Jan. 26, 2009 study [12]on the implications of camera surveillance such as Google. Maybe they’re considered too private.
Meanwhile, some Canadians [13] are wondering how many bloopers are in the new Street View maps. It’s become a popular [14]past [15]–time [16] in America, where the maps were launched May 2007.
The only thing I’ve been able to find so far is Robert Jago of [17]A Dime A Dozen Blog [17] claiming this shot of East Hastings Street in Vancouver [18] is a drug deal caught on camera. I have to squint really hard to see it, and use a bit of my imagination, but if that’s the extent of privacy concerns with Google Street View, frankly, I’m not that concerned.