Boring v. Google, Inc.

362 Fed.Appx. 273 (3rd Cir. 2010)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps sued D for invasion of privacy, trespass, injunctive relief, negligence, and conversion. Ps sought compensatory, incidental, and consequential damages in excess of $25,000 for each claim, plus punitive damages and attorney's fees. In D's 'Street View' program, a feature on Google Maps, D offers free access on the Internet to panoramic, navigable views of streets in and around major cities across the United States. To create the program, representatives of D attach panoramic digital cameras to passenger cars and drive around cities photographing the areas along the street. According to D, this is done on public roads. Ps live on a private road in Pittsburgh, and discovered that D had taken 'colored imagery of their residence, including the swimming pool, from a vehicle in their residence driveway months earlier without obtaining any privacy waiver or authorization.' Ps allege that their road is clearly marked with a 'Private Road, No Trespassing' sign. D filed a motion to dismiss. The District Court granted D's motion to dismiss as to all of the claims. P was unable to show in the invasion of privacy claim that D's conduct was highly offensive to a person of ordinary sensibilities. It dismissed the negligence claim because it found that D did not owe a duty to Ps. The trespass claim was dismissed because Ps could not show damages. The unjust enrichment claim was dismissed because the parties had no relationship that could be construed as contractual, and Ps did not confer anything of value upon D. Ps eventually appealed.