Google Street View in Germany

In March 2011, a Berlin court ruled that Google Street View was not illegal after a private citizen filed a lawsuit, claiming the technology was an infringement of her property and privacy rights. Sebastian Huempfer looks at the case.

Google announced in May 2009 that it would expand Street View, its street-level imaging service, to 20 major cities in Germany. Following public and political pressure, Google worked with German authorities and gave households the chance to opt out and have images of their properties blurred. When the service was launched, 244,000 German households had opted out. The opt-out process was supervised by the Technical Inspection Agency, an organisation, which certifies the safety of consumer products in Germany.

In March 2011, a Berlin court decided that Google Street View was not illegal. The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by a private citizen who had argued that her property and privacy rights could potentially be violated by Google Street View. She had argued that the cameras, mounted atop poles up to three metres high, allowed Google to take photos of her property, despite her house being shielded by a two metre-high hedge. Google has argued that there are no legal barriers for its service in Germany.

By the end of 2011, public concern and debate had largely subsided. Only 80,000 households opted out of Microsoft’s Bing Streetside. According to Google, Germans are amongst the heaviest users of Street View. After the introduction of Street View, usage of Google Maps rose by 25%. However, Google did not expand its service in Germany beyond the initial 20 cities, and has not updated photos of existing (and in some cases no-longer-existing) buildings since 2008.

Read more:

Comments (2)

Automated machine translations are provided by Google Translate. They should give you a rough idea of what the contributor has said, but cannot be relied on to give an accurate, nuanced translation. Please read them with this in mind.

  1. Two comments from Viktor-Mayer Schoenberger at our event “Does Facebook Know To Much?:

    — Many of those who objected did so because they feared that criminals would use Street View to find promising targets for burglaries.

    — VMS argued that by obscuring your house, you send a signal that you are a promising target because you have something to hide. Hence, his important point is that EVEN IF YOU OPTED OUT, you were still forced to send a message to users of Street View – even if it’s just “I don’t like this”. Is this justifiable?

    I would still argue that the right to opt out is a reasonable and sufficient concession. Given that 250 000 people opted out, I don’t think any of them sent a clear signal of any kind – there are just too many different but conceivable motives: some opted out because of burglars, some because they don’t want to be profiled, some because they built fences in the real world and thus want them online as well, and so on.

Leave a comment in any language

Read More

Swipe left to browse all of the highlights.

Do you agree with this principle?

Yes No

Free Speech Debate is a research project of the Dahrendorf Programme for the Study of Freedom at St Antony's College in the University of Oxford.

The University of Oxford