Showing posts with label Google Street View. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google Street View. Show all posts

1 November 2010

Weekly Cyber-Law News Round-Up

What a week it has been!! Here are my personal picks of the highlights of last week`s news which relate to internet law. As always privacy and intellectual property issues are dominating the legal landscape of cyber-law news!

Google
Intellectual Property
· Google clarifies AdWords policy to satisfy French competition regulator http://bit.ly/atAR6g
· Google's 'copied Java code' disowned by Apache #androidlawsuit http://ow.ly/32pPL
· Great and thorough analysis of Viacom v YouTube and impact of safe harbour #copyright #DMCA #Viacom= #YouTube #in http://ow.ly/30Jtk
· Google Goes After YouTubeSocial For #Trademark Infringement
Streetview
· UK MPs question Google over Street View data breaches #privacy #in http://ow.ly/32pV7
· MPs accuse Google on wi-fi data http://bbc.in/aOjlTC
· FTC sends letter to Google - drops Google WiFi case, but tells Google its privacy processes are inadequate #privacy http://bit.ly/aPEQcL
· Google says its cars grabbed e-mails, passwords http://ow.ly/2Zpnj #privacy
· Italy Orders #Google To Clearly Label Street View Cars, Advertise Routes http://ow.ly/2Zpjn
· Regulators closing in on Google http://ow.ly/2ZsLf #StreetView #privacy
· Google investigated over household data privacy breaches by ICO http://ow.ly/2YLpq
YouTube
· Turkey lifts two-year ban on YouTube #censorship #regionalblocking http://ow.ly/32pVY
· Great and thorough analysis of Viacom v YouTube and impact of safe harbour #copyright #DMCA #Viacom= #YouTube #in http://ow.ly/30Jtk
· Google Goes After YouTubeSocial For #Trademark Infringement
Facebook
Privacy
· Facebook app developers sold user info http://ow.ly/32q21 #privacy #in
· Facebook locks down private user data after app controversy #privacy #in http://ow.ly/32pSA
· Court Orders Disclosure of Facebook and MySpace Passwords in Personal Injury Case
· Facebook Allows Users To Turn Off Group Chat http://ow.ly/2ZpvT
· Firesheep Exposes Flaw In #Facebook Log-In Security http://ow.ly/2Zptw #security
Intellectual Property
· Facebook Files for #Patent on Inferential Ad Targeting http://ow.ly/30Jm8
· Facebook comes down hard on Faceporn for #trademark infringement http://ow.ly/2YLk2
Limewire
· As LimeWire Shuts Its Doors, Other P2P Clients See a Surge in Usage #copyright #in #filesharing http://ow.ly/32pWO
· Limewire shuts down after receiving permanent injunction #copyright http://ow.ly/308HB
Other Intellectual Property News
· Twitter Issues New Guidelines for the Tweet Trademark http://ow.ly/32pXh #trademark #in
· Apple sues Motorola over smartphone #patents http://ow.ly/32pQH
· Taiwanese company threatens Apple with legal action over iPad name #trademark http://ow.ly/30J6r
Other Privacy News
· Berlin Privacy Commissioner Dix proposes principle of Anonymization and Pseudonymization. #OECD30 #privacy
· #EFF Urges EU Data Protection Authorities to Call for the Repeal of the EU Data Retention Directive http://ow.ly/2ZpfB #dataretention
Personal Jurisdiction
· Email and phone contacts help to establish personal jurisdiction in US case VEDICSOFT v. MILLENNIUM CONSULTING http://bit.ly/9lTaZ6
Defamation
· Hoteliers Look to Shield Themselves From Dishonest Online Reviews http://ow.ly/2Zpq4
Cyber-Warfare
· Emergency Powers in Cyberspace http://ow.ly/32pRE #cyber-warfare
· US Air Force #cyberwarfare manual goes public http://ow.ly/2ZpiB

24 September 2010

Weekly Cyber-Law News Round

Wow this week has flown by so quickly: where did it all go?!! It has been quite exciting week in terms of legal developments in the area of cyberspace. The usual suspects are in the news: Google Street View, Facebook, piracy, and privacy. But it has also been a week of great significance for copyright laws in the UK (adoption of the Gallo report), and some surprising developments in trademarks law (woman claiming trademark protection for her name).

My pick of the top cyber-law news for this week in descending chronological order:

  • Google's 'Street View' banned for privacy invasion Czech Republic's privacy watchdog says Google http://bit.ly/cgJrA9
  • US Autodesk decision gives software company the tool to prevent the resale of licensed software by unauthorised third parties http://tinyurl.com/33u2bev #in
  • Google's new Transparency Report logs government requests for personal info, takedown requests and blocking: http://bit.ly/dueLKf
  • Lawyers Sued Over Blog Posts Criticizing Referral Hotline for Personal Injury Cases http://is.gd/flsUg
  • Woman Trademarks Her Name, Says No One Can Use It Without Her Permission http://ow.ly/2GSXx
Hope you guys enjoy the new weekly cyber-law news round!

22 March 2009

Of blurring technologies and mapping technologies

The launch of Street View in the United Kingdom was never going to be a quiet affair. Beyond the usual fanfare of publicity and the slogans presenting it as the thing we need most, Street View was also going to attract a lot of issues related to protection of privacy of the individuals who are captured on the displayed images.

Hence it does not surprise CyberPanda in the least that Street View had to pull some of the displayed images after receiving a number of complaints from the individuals who were shown in those images. The images captured a lot of moments deemed to be private as an individual entering his home or individuals being arrested. Street View acted promptly and removed the offending pictures as soon as the complaints were received.


However the real issue is why such pictures were deemed fit to appear on the website in the first place. It is surely obvious to any data controller that such pictures will infringe the expectations of privacy of those captured in the images. To be fair to Street View, this situation is not entirely its fault. Other equally important actors are involved, namely, the Information Commissioner and legislators. The Information Commissioner gave the go ahead earlier in 2008 for such web sites to used images deemed to be private as long as identifying features as faces or registration plates were blurred. However, what the IC has failed to recognise is that the use of blurring technology is not sufficient on its own to displace the expectations of privacy of captured individual who can still be easily identified by his/her attire, location and other seemingly innocent but yet incriminating information. Finally, the notion of reasonable expectation of privacy is not easily protected in the UK when it comes to such websites as the legislators and policy-makers are yet to decide on when virtual spaces are private or public. The challenge of course is to determine the boundaries of such a divide which is not an easy task in cyberspace in any event.

Disclaimer: The image used above is subject to the intellectual property rights of third parties. Click here to view the image in its original context.

20 February 2009

A case against Google Street Map? Or a case of DIY?

Many avid followers and readers of CyberPanda have complained about the lack of posts recently. So after a period of (unwanted and involuntary!) silence due to having only 12 hours in a day (how is a doctoral student suppose to stumble on a good idea with only 12 hours in a day!!), CyberPanda is back and will try to maintain more regular posts!

Some breaking news all the way from the Silicon Valley, where the US Courts have dismissed a case against Google Street View. The Plaintiffs sued Google Street View on various grounds including breach privacy and tresspass, following the publication of photos of their home by the mapping program. The Courts took the view that the Plaintiffs did not successfully prove their case in this instance. A factor that weighed heavily against the Plaintiffs was the fact that they did not take advantage of the self-help remedy that was available to them, namely, removing the photos from Google Street View. This is an interesting ruling which seems to judicial endorse the use of technological measures (as removal tools) as self-help measures for the protection of privacy interests in cyberspace. Hence it may be the case that net users will not have actionable causes of actions if they fail to use available self-help remedies. It would be interesting to see what the position would have been, had the Claimants availed themselves of the self-help remedy and still claimed damages for invasion of privacy.