Well, this sounds like a gated community. People are not supposed to just drive through without any reason unless they are visiting someone who lives there. I have no doubt there was a no trespassing sign. So this isn't like driving through downtown for sight seeing.

Can someone just walk into your house and start taking pictures without permission? Then post them on the internet for all to see? Probably not.

If you do think about it, while it is a cool feature it is also extremely helpful for intelligence gathering for whoever. Thieves, drug dealers, maybe even other businesses. So communities like this should be able to opt out. Especially if the entire community agrees.

Google backed down from this fight not on legal grounds but rather for public relations purposes. The federal courts have already ruled that privately owned streets in a closed community such as this that is INCORPORATED as a town must allow equal access to them in the same manner as publicly owned streets since the town is incorporated. Google would've won on legal grounds, but they opted not to take the public relations heat for it. On the other hand, it will be interesting to see how soon before all references to this town are dropped from Google's search engine in retaliation.

Finally someone stepping up against the burdening of privacy (or what's still left of it).

Public streets in most cases, my friend.

No privacy to be expected.

trespassing?? damn white old people

Does GOOGLE pay taxes to use those roads? NO the citizens of that community do in their local property taxes. and if they as a community say stay out they need to respect that and leave that data offline. Personally I have a real problem with this for many reasons... Recently Google street view has made it so Easy to track and locate a location that people have NO BUSINESS finding, that its practically criminal. Especially home residencies.

Do a google search, Find someone, Fine a name, use people search to get more info on person, translate results into google maps, Bing bang boom within about 15 mins I can find just about anyones home address and have a really good look at their property and possibly many different angles. Never once actually being there to be observed.

Then if the nefarious foe is really cunning the google street view can scout out hiding places to observe IRL. Something not possible from Birds eye view...

Point is This is just a minor use of such a service from someone that can Imagine such a thing. Now just think of someone that obsesses of such things using the technology to prey on their victims... Point is there should be a easy and FINAL Opt out system to keep such information OFF Google if someone feels they should. I mean Imagine a rapist, or a thief, or even just a regular pervert using such systems to find their prey? IMHO Its tantamount to aiding and abiding.

Tracking and displaying business districts is one thing (acceptable and expected), but when it comes to Residential, They have NO right putting such information on the web for any Joe blow pervert to find.

Case in point recently A mutual friend asked me to do a little checking to be sure they and more importantly their daughters Identity was safe online. All I was given was her myspace page... I showed them while on the phone that within about 20 mins I had not only her full name, her birthday, but also her parents names, their address, the high school she goes too, their employers names, and pictures of their house from the air and from about 5 different angles on the ground. that was with Minimal information from about 5 different sources. but the most disturbing of which to them was the fact that I could get pictures of their house from google THAT easily.
From the back angles From a neighboring road I was able to actually see the window to their daughters room, with the pink princess window curtains.

I showed them some very basic things to do to enhance their privacy online (on myspace, on people search, and on google maps), but up until that point obviously they had no clue really how much info is out there about them and their 17 yr old daughter. And thats the same for the majority of people out there really... That have no clue.

Do a google search, Find someone, Fine a name, use people search to get more info on person, translate results into google maps, Bing bang boom within about 15 mins I can find just about anyones home address and have a really good look at their property and possibly many different angles. Never once actually being there to be observed.

Nothing that cannot be done in 15 minutes at your local library with a local map and one or two drive-by photographs.

Seriously. Someone that obsessed will find a way no matter the effort required.

Why should we shun helpful, useful technology based solely on the potential of abuse for a small majority of the population?

Tyranny of the few and disturbed? No thanks.

True. I'll give you that...

And I don't disagree the technology should be there if people want it. But they should be informed of it and given an opt out for residential areas.

A notice of some kinda would be nice is what i am saying. Many have no idea its even happened in their area, and still more do not even use google to know its there...

Hmmm, private. Someone needs to look into this. Do they or have they ever received ANY state or federal funding for roads, storms, etc?? If so how is this a "Private" town when we ALL pay taxes that they freely use. Any funding they have ever received needs to be paid back to the agency that funded it, along with interest, and then the courts need to get into it and start filing charges on anyone in office in that "hoity-toity" town for mis-use of state and federal funds on a "Private Community". If they want a Private community then so be it, but tax payers should not be made to pay our money for their personal issues. Sounds shady and very "hoity-toity" to me...

Totally crazy idea. If they don't like the pictures, get them removed. There are a whole pile of Google Street Views that have been censored already:

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com

Totally crazy idea. If they don't like the pictures, get them removed. There are a whole pile of Google Street Views that have been censored already:

http://streetviewgallery.corank.com

"All residential roads in the City are private and for the use of North Oaks residents and their invited guests only,"

This is the *only* reason I am not laughing at them. I'm still chuckling, but not laughing. Their roads are private, they get a pass.

Anywhere else where the roads are public are free game. Journalists have been able to use street-side shots for years as they are taken from public property.

It's not like Google is using some high-zoom camera allowing people to see the gunrack in your living room or the porn playing on your TV.

Any 'non-invited' person is trespassing in the city.

Sounds pretty "hoity-toity" to me.

Google is intrusive and disrespectful of privacy, and it needs to be throttled. Period.

Heh..

You hate journalists as well then, don't ya?

They've been taking street-shots for decades. No-one seems to have a problem with that. Just when it's Google doing it.

*yawn*

I hate journalists, but I think you mean photographers.
You sound tired, get some rest.

OPk, compromise.

Photo-journalists?

Google Earth sucks a fat a** with it's six year old maps. Half of the things I look for aren't even there like I don't know ..... an entire 12 mile stretch of highway called I-355 near Chicago.

Yes cause google or anyone else can shoot entirely new shots of the entire earth every day.

Parts of seattle are several years old but my neighbor hood has my brand new car that I have had less then 2 months.

So any 'non-invited' person is trespassing in the city?

Fascinating.

So much for equal enforcement of the law.

Their effort is as lame as they claim Google's to be.

"The City Council for the 4,500-resident town of North Oaks, Minnesota sent a letter to Google in January giving the company the option to either remove the imagery or be cited for trespassing"

Now thats funny. I totally agree with the city council.

As long as Google stays on public streets there is nothing anyone can do? If they are in fact private streets then that's different. If you don't want to be seen from the road build yourself a wall.

Most of the roads there are probably city property. So my guess is the city can charge you with trespassing on city roads just like they do with other city properties.

They probably have at least a fence surrounding the whole town. And I support these folks, too..Street View is useful only to terrorists and stalkers.

Street View is useful only to terrorists and stalkers.

So which am I?

I can imagine *many* recent trips where it would have been *very* useful to run the last mile or so to the destination using street-view to familiarize myself with the surroundings.

Roads in the city are privately owned...

And just where did you learn to read?

I know they are privately owned. I didn't feel like editing my post, although i should have, because it could be a reason if other cities did this with google in the future (if it is allowed).

Happy O Rude One?

I agree entirely. Cited for trespassing. That's sticking it to 'em.