Man Awarded $12,500 After Google Street View Photographed His Ass
The man, a police officer, was naked in his yard in 2017 when a Google Street View car came driving by. Even though he was behind a six-and-a-half-foot-tall fence, the camera caught him, quite literally, with his pants down. Google typically blurs faces when they appear on camera, but butts apparently can make it through the censors, and the man had his ass plastered on the internet, and it was easily identifiable along with his street name and home address.
According to CBS News, the man claimed that he was humiliated by the situation, subjected to ridicule from his coworkers and neighbors, all because Google's cameras could peep over his wall that kept his nudity private from prying eyes at normal human heights. Google, per the report, argued that his wall was not high enough, which is technically true in the sense that it literally did not prevent him from being photographed—though one could reasonably assume the wall was not installed with car-mounted, 360-degree cameras in mind.
The man's first attempt to get compensation was rejected by a court, which said he had no claim to damages and no one to blame but himself for 'walking around in inappropriate conditions in the garden of his home.' Which, you know, that's not an entirely wrong conclusion.
But an appeals court saw it his way, recognizing that his privacy was violated by the photo. 'This involves an image of a person that was not captured in a public space but within the confines of their home, behind a fence taller than the average-sized person,' the court said, calling the invasion of privacy 'blatant' and the whole situation an 'arbitrary intrusion into another's life.'
The court pointed out that Google has a practice of blurring faces and license plates on phones taken by its Street View cameras, so it clearly understands the potential harm that could occur if it published a photo of someone without permission. So it does seem a little weird to not blur the fully naked guy. 'No one wants to appear exposed to the world as the day they were born,' the judges wrote.
For his troubles, the man was awarded the $12.5k in damages from Google—which is significantly more than the $1 it paid to a Pittsburgh-area couple who accused the company of trespassing by taking photos of their private road, but less than the $13 million settlement it paid in a class-action case accusing it of collecting personal information as part of its Street View project.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Car loan scandal payouts row - what's it about?
A compensation scheme over car finance mis-selling has been proposed by the financial regulator. It comes after a Supreme Court ruling on Friday, that sided with finance companies in two out of three crucial test cases focusing on commission payments made by banks and other credit providers to car dealers. The judgement means millions of motorists will not be able to claim, but it left open the possibility of compensation claims for drivers who were subject to particularly large commission charges - which the Supreme Court said were unfair. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has now said it will consult on running a payout scheme. What's the scandal about? The vast majority of new cars, and many second-hand ones, are bought with finance agreements. About two million are sold this way each year, with customers paying an initial deposit, then a monthly fee with interest for the vehicle. In 2021, the FCA banned deals in which the dealer received a commission from the lender, based on the interest rate charged to the customer. These were known as discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs). The FCA said this provided an incentive for a buyer to be charged a higher-than-necessary interest rate, leaving them paying too much. Since January, it has been considering whether compensation should be paid to people with these deals before 2021. Any claims on this issue made to the ombudsman, which has 80,000 open cases, or the courts, were effectively on hold until Friday's Supreme Court ruling. The Supreme Court considered three test cases. The cases focused on whether commission payments made by finance companies to dealers, of which the car buyers were unaware, amounted to bribery - and whether the car dealers themselves had a duty to act on behalf of their customers, rather than in their own interests. If it had been upheld, this could have paved the way for millions to claim compensation, but the court ruled against two of the test cases, siding with finance companies. This has narrowed the scope of people who will be able to claim compensation. How much could victims receive, and when? The consultation on who should be eligible and how much they should receive will begin in October, with the first payments expected next year, the FCA said. Victims are likely receive less than £950 per deal under the proposed compensation scheme, the regulator said. It says that the total estimated cost of the redress will be between £9bn and £18bn. The authority says it is "hard to estimate precisely at this stage the total cost to industry of the scheme", but millions of consumers could be eligible. It added that the amount of money victims receive will depend on the "degree of harm suffered by the consumer and the need to ensure consumers continue to be able to access affordable loans for motor vehicles". Those who have already complained do not need to do anything, the regulator said, advising those who have yet to complain to contact their car loan provider rather than using a claims management company. It added that it "anticipate[s] requiring firms as far as possible to make customers aware they may be eligible and what they may need to do" and that claims "should cover agreements dating back to 2007". Who would foot the bill? The industry is expected to cover the full costs of any potential compensation scheme, including any administrative costs. Lenders - including some of the UK's biggest banks and specialist motor finance firms - have set aside more than £2bn for potential payouts already. Lloyds Bank has put aside £1.15bn, and Santander has allocated £295m. Financing companies have also set aside millions, including Close Brothers (£165m), Northridge Finance (£143m) and MotoNovo (through the bank FirstRand, £140m). Some of that money has been earmarked to cover legal and administrative costs. The FCA says any redress scheme would need to balance fairness to consumers who lost out, with ensuring "the integrity of the motor finance market, so it works well for future consumers". What was the case that succeeded in the Supreme Court? On Friday, the Supreme Court reversed earlier court rulings in three test cases which said that hidden commissions on car loans were unlawful. The one test case which was upheld was that of Marcus Johnson, 34, from Cwmbran, Torfaen, who bought his first car - a Suzuki Swift - in 2017. He was not informed the car dealership was being paid 25% commission, which was added on to what he had to pay back. "I signed a few documents and then drove away in the car," he told the BBC. He said he had no option but to use finance when he bought the car, describing it as "heartbreaking" to find out so much extra money had been taken. Mr Johnson said he was "pleased for myself" that his case was won, "but not for the hundreds of others" who will miss out. "It's a win, but it's a really big bag of salt to go with it." In his case, the Supreme Court said the terms of his finance deal were unfair due of the size of the commission payment, and the fact he was appeared to have been misled over the relationship between the finance firm and the dealer. The FCA said Friday's judgement "helps us because we have been looking at what is unfair and, prior to this judgment, there were different interpretations of the law coming from different courts". Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Brazil's Bolsonaro supporters protest against Supreme Court, President Lula
RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) -Supporters of Brazil's former President Jair Bolsonaro, accused of plotting a coup after he lost the 2022 general election, gathered on the streets of several Brazilian cities on Sunday to protest against Supreme Federal Court (STF) Justice Alexandre de Moraes and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The protesters called for "amnesty" for those involved in the alleged coup attempt days after Lula's inauguration in January 2023. Far-right leader Bolsonaro did not personally attend the demonstrations, but was put on the telephone by his son, Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, during the protest in Rio de Janeiro. The former president, who is on house arrest, wears an electronic ankle bracelet and cannot leave his home on weekends and holidays, as per an order from Justice Moraes. In March, a five-judge STF panel decided unanimously to put Bolsonaro on trial for allegedly conspiring to overthrow Lula. If found guilty in the court proceedings expected later this year, Bolsonaro could face a long prison sentence. Last month, Moraes imposed precautionary measures against Bolsonaro because he believed he and his son, Eduardo, an elected lawmaker who is now living in the U.S., had collaborated with U.S. authorities to try to interfere in Brazilian affairs. Last week, the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a 50% tariff on most Brazilian goods, citing a "witch hunt" against Bolsonaro. It also imposed financial sanctions against Moraes under the Magnitsky Act, which allows the U.S. to impose economic penalties against foreigners it considers to have a record of corruption or human rights abuses. Moraes is the reporting justice in the case in which Jair Bolsonaro is a defendant. In Sunday's protests, Bolsonaro supporters, wearing Brazilian national team jerseys, chanted "Magnitsky" and insulted Moraes and Lula. American flags and signs supporting Trump were also seen.
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Appeals judges order ICC prosecutor to recuse himself from Venezuela investigation
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Appeals judges at the International Criminal Court on Friday ordered chief prosecutor Karim Khan to recuse himself from an investigation into Venezuela, citing a conflict of interest. Khan's sister-in-law, international criminal lawyer Venkateswari Alagendra, has been part of a team representing the government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and the five-judge appeals panel at the ICC says her involvement creates an issue of 'bias' for the prosecutor. The British barrister, who is currently on leave from the court, stepped down temporarily pending an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct. Alagendra and Khan worked together previously on cases, including as defense counsel for Kenyan President William Ruto and for Seif al-Islam Gadhafi, the son of the late Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Alagendra is the sister of Khan's wife, human rights lawyer Shyamala Alagendra. The Washington-based Arcadia Foundation, which focuses on human rights issues in Venezuela, filed a complaint with the court in 2024, asking for Khan to be removed from the case over a conflict of interest. The court dismissed the initial complaint in February. In written filings, Khan told the court he could not 'recall' any discussion with his sister-in-law about the facts of the case and did not attend any meetings where she was present. The ICC has an ongoing investigation into violence that followed Venezuela's 2017 election but has so far not sought any arrest warrants. Khan announced in late 2021 that he was opening the investigation after a lengthy preliminary probe and an official referral — a request to investigate — in 2018 from Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay and Peru. However, the full-scale investigation was put on hold when Venezuelan authorities said they wanted to take over the case. The ICC is a court of last resort that only takes on cases when national authorities are unwilling or unable to investigate, a system known as complementarity. Khan pressed ahead with efforts to continue the court's first investigation in Latin America. ICC judges agreed with Khan and authorized him to resume investigations in Venezuela in 2023. Solve the daily Crossword
