A Google Street View car took a photo of an Argentine man naked, in his backyard, living in a small town. The man was a police officer and stood behind a six-foot-six wall. Google had a photo of him naked. His house number and street name were visible.

The Effect on The Man
The photo brought embarrassment at work. Neighbors ridiculed him. People shared the picture on the internet. The incident harmed his dignity. He felt violated at a very deep level. The public display caused issues in his life, so he set out to do something about it.

Court Action
The man sued Google in 2019, claiming the image violated his privacy rights. The lower court dismissed his case and rejected his claims, stating he appeared naked outside. The man disagreed. He appealed the ruling.

Appeals Ruling
This month the appeals court overturned the ruling and awarded him Rs 10.8 lakh (12,500 USD). The appeals court acknowledged the wall’s height and confirmed the man was exposed outside; however, the wall exceeded average human height. The appeals court acknowledged the privacy violation to be egregious and expressed the need to protect one’s personal dignity.

The judges recognized that the man was not in a public space but remained protected within the privacy of his yard. Google had failed to blur his naked body from a legitimate camera angle. The court chastised Google for their negligence and recognized how they had caused damage. The judges highlighted the fact that no human being wants to have this kind of public exposure.

Google’s Defense
Google stated the wall’s height wasn’t sufficient. It could not provide enough privacy. The court rejected this defense. The judges focused on the privacy issue surrounding the man. Google had crossed the line.

Google’s Blurring Policy
Google blurs faces and plates. This privacy process offers a means to protect identities. The policy shows that Google accepts these duties. Google did not blur the man’s body and the court said that it was unacceptable.

Google’s Options of Response
Google’s website has information about the Street View policy, which explains that users can ask for blurring of houses or bodies. Google has a “Report a problem” tool that users can use to ask for any blurring. The man’s photo was not flagged for blurring, because Google never pursued this option.

Outcome and Consequences
The judges ruling on the case supports a person’s privacy rights, and hold Google accountable. The man’s suffering entitled him to compensation. It demonstrates that technology can infringe on privacy and companies need to be a good corporate citizen.

Also Read: Get Netflix For Free: Top Recharge Plans You Should Know In 2025

Going forward, the case emphasizes the need to continue safeguarding privacy. Google will need to reassess its policies related to Street View.

Share

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•