back to article Street View catches Finn with his pants down

The Finnish authorities have launched an enquiry into what they consider a serious breach of privacy on Street View, after a snooping spymobile captured a chap wearing less clothes than is advisable when Google comes a-calling. The trail begins at this house, at Maakaarentie 14, in Raahe. Behind that wooden fence is someone …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    sunbathing

    I can see he was doing some sunbathing and expecting some privacy. The things to bear in mind is that the block of flats which he can see are behind trees, plus he is behind a bush and a fence so the angle of view from the flats means he is probably hidden. HOWEVER, Google's camera on a car is stuck up about 3m so can look over his fence, plus they can view him from an angle which flat owners cannot see from. The main problem is Google has a very high camera which can see over normal height fences - which is why in Japan they've been forced to use a more normal height.

    Paris 'cause she needs some voyeuring.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Blimey, give your nads an airing

    and the world's turned into a peeping tom. Those cameras are up quite high on the cars, so it maybe he had privacy unless some pops up the telescope.

    I do wish Google would stop with this bollocks, no one really wants to see a bunch of people who didn't want to be photographed splashed across the web.

    They should drive round at night, and use a night cam with some daylight filter, because then you can see the landmarks, which are useful.

  3. Winkypop Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Finnish Todger View

    Now available on Google! [beta]

  4. ShaggyDoggy

    @ oliver 8

    He was behind a 7 foot fence - the camera is on a pole on a car.

    Kids aren't.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Oh I miss the days

    when a man can have a quiet wank in his garden without....

    /cough, I mean what a disgrace.

  6. TeeCee Gold badge
    Grenade

    "....a less compromising pose..."

    Ok, I'm intrigued. Exactly how is being immortalised on teh intawebs in a rampant display of onanistic love less compromising than being seen just sitting there with yer meat 'n two veg out on the counter?

  7. Halo

    Let me know your number, clearly you are up for it

    While it may seem stange to some, being naked is not strange in finland. I remember going there to see my cousin, met him and about 6-8 other men (his parents and women, GFs, Wifes as well), we had a few drinks and they were polite to start with before we got into things, im black, or as is no longer PC halfjack, anyway them not having met a black and having low opinion of british men and most non nordic men they wanted to see if I really had finnish blood, so we went to the sauna and got naked, 8-10 of us and id diiddnr, in finland it would be rude not to ask another person to join you in a sauna. So finns are used to seeing naked people.

    In finland being naked is not a big deal. In finland you have the right to walk in your house naked and sit in your backyard naked because it's your house, you own it and you can damm well sit were you like.

    If someone wants to take a picture of you they damm well ask, if they don,t then at the least that it rude and if you are sitting in your land it's an invasion of your privacy. Walking past and seeing someone naked is one thing but if you take a picture, that is a deliberate act. GooGle is saying we have the right to put cameras around your house 24/7 and film you, that the issue for you dicks that think it is about a person not being dressed in a way you would aprove of.

    and thats the reason why the finns think it is important.

  8. Andus McCoatover

    Bit worrying.

    This was obviously taken (at a guess) Midsummer 2008. As Raahe's only 80Km (50 miles) south from where I live, and we've a metre of snow, -15 as I write, I definitely wouldn't get my 'nads out today.

    Which means they've had plenty of time to get more pics. But, now it's been in my city.

    http://www.65degreesnorth.com/content/view/1381/54/

    Oh, living here, I've seen worse. Much worse. This is by no means particularly unusual. (e.g, middle of the city, couple 'making bacon' on the town hall grass - people just sniggered, and moved on. I didn't see anyone take a single photo in the 20 minutes I was there).

    1. Jack Garnham
      Happy

      @Andus McCoatover

      You were stood watching them for 20 minutes? Dirty git.

      1. Andus McCoatover
        Pint

        20 Minutes? Research, natch.

        With the privacy laws in Finland concerning photography, I was making sure no-one nearby snapped one off. Well, citizens' duty. Aint it? ;-)

        (T'is Friday, and we're all having a beer or two to the BOFH's untimely demise. Plus, crying our eyes out that the PFY's got hold of the Sacred Keyboard).

  9. Bilgepipe
    WTF?

    Erm.....

    Is that a child on the seat next to him in the second picture?

    1. Andus McCoatover

      I wondered that at first, too

      But, no it's not. Just a white deckchair with a bit of background behind it (Maybe a sauna jacket - but like a bathrobe)

  10. Count Ludwig
    Big Brother

    @Bit Worrying @Erm...

    @Bit Worrying

    20 mins - that's nothing - I've watched Finns at it in Public it for nearly an hour - which coincidentally is how long it took me to casually do up my shoelaces.

    @Erm...

    I think it's an optical illusion - back and arm of the white plastic chair next to him, plus something behind the swing seat. But that would still make the picture an offence in UK - as a depiction of child abuse.

  11. archengel46
    Thumb Up

    How do you??

    Imprison Google for 1 year? :O

    Maybe the Chinese and the Iranians will be happier then.

  12. Unus Radix

    My interpretation of Finnish law

    The Finnish law actually provides stronger protection than that of being entitled to privacy under an expectation thereof: as long as one is inside one's home or even in the immediately surrounding area it is a criminal offense to make a record of one with a "technical apparatus" (in practice, a camera). Fines and imprisonment up to 1 yr are in store for offenders. Prison, obviously, can only be applied to the person(s) responsible, but I see no reason for this not percolating up in the chain of command as having someone commit a criminal act for you is equivalent of committing it yourself.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like