If you can’t kill it, bill it: German city charges Google Street View by the kilometre

Germans are very picky when it comes to online privacy. Not only is Google Analytics in danger of being banned for storing user data on ‘foreign servers’, Facebook apps are probably illegal because they pass too much private information to third parties. Also Google Street View is a constant bone of contention. Several mayors of cities and villages like Molfsee or Pfaffenhofen have already tried to ban Google’s camera cars from their streets, until someone told them there was no law against driving around taking pictures.

A study from Ingolstadt even recommends installing specific Street View prohibition signs on private properties. Although local politicians apparently don’t like it, they can’t make the photo service illegal. Every single house owner has to ask Google themselves to get their removed from Street View. A complete ban would violate article 12 of Germany’s constitution which protects the freedom of occupation.

Therefore the city of Ratingen yesterday took an interesting decision: If you can’t kill it, then bill it. The finance committee ruled with 12 to 7 votes that Google has to pay €20 per kilometer to take pictures of the city. The head of Ratingen’s law department, Dirk Tratzig, had found out that a photographical capturing of the entire town is a “special usage” as defined in article 18 of the streets law of the province of Northrine Westfalia. Thus Google can be charged.

via If you can’t kill it, bill it: German city charges Google Street View by the kilometre.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Communications with Attorney Using Company Computer and Email Account Not Protected by Attorney-Client Privilege : Electronic Discovery Law

Alamar Ranch, LLC v. City of Boise, 2009 WL 3669741 (D. Idaho Nov. 2, 2009)

In this case arising from a land use and permitting dispute, the court ruled that emails sent by a non-party to her attorney using her work computer and work-assigned email address were not protected by the attorney-client privilege.  In so holding, the court relied in large part upon the existence of company policy which put the employee on notice that her emails were subject to monitoring and were not confidential.  Emails sent by the attorney to the employee’s work account were likewise unprotected where the attorney was on notice of the employee’s use of company email and should have recognized the risk that such emails were unprotected.  As for emails sent to the attorney by other clients and copied to the employee, the court reasoned that such emails retained their privileged status where the senders non-employees of the relevant company were not on notice of the potential exposure of their emails to outside scrutiny.

[continued] Communications with Attorney Using Company Computer and Email Account Not Protected by Attorney-Client Privilege : Electronic Discovery Law.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Los Angeles adopts Google e-mail system for 30,000 city employees

The Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously today to outsource its e-mail system to Google Inc., making it the largest city in the nation to make the move and handing the Web search giant a major victory in its quest to become a software provider to the world’s cities and businesses.

After more than two hours of debate, council members voted 12-0 to approve the $7.25-million contract that would move all 30,000 city employees to Google’s so-called cloud over the coming year.

“The City of Los Angeles, the second largest city in the nation, made a world-class decision today to support a state-of-the art e-mail system,” said Councilman Tony Cardenas, who made the motion to approve the Google system.

via Los Angeles adopts Google e-mail system for 30,000 city employees | Technology | Los Angeles Times.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare