Are there privacy rights to prevent online maps showing buildings

Luttrell1975

To start off I want to discuss the legal concept of privacy, which is something I have some trained on for years, but I am not a solicitor. I was a participant in two threads on the farming and forestry groups (ask the local moderators why there needed to be two🙄) that are set out here and here and are now closed, so done and dusted. I do however have a legal question or two which I will come to at the end. My motivation for posting this here is that a moderator explicitly told me I should not be discussing laws, as the OP "didn't want that". But here I am.

There are dozens of ways to receive map based information that display buildings, and their addresses. Google, Garmin, Mbux and TomTom all do that. You can download thousands of phone apps that have buildings on them. You can use your desk computer to look at loads of online maps, other than Google. The genie of buildings appearing on maps is long since out of the bottle.

In this case these threads were about whether the buildings that are owned by farmers can be included and labelled on maps, specifically OpenStreetMaps. There are some technical issues but the discussion goes on some loops and one is caused by the fact that some farmer labelled his own sheds by their usages (including the words "machinery shed" and "tool shed"). OpenStreetMaps of Ireland were posting to confirm it was an isolated case with one of the contributors and this was amended. What I want to say is that mapping a building on private land does not involve physically being there, so there is no intrusive visiting and no permission to do same. Mapping takes place using satellite images that are made available by Bing and ESRI GIS to OpenStreetMaps. Obviously these are obtained from satellites which pass through the sky every few hours. The resulting imagery is copied or traced within a license agreement which provides for this copying.

However, one poster took it upon himself/herself to keep reacting to that, as if the precise usage tag that happened once was a general pattern. Others reacted as if there is a Data Protection issue. Others conceded that they don't know the law, but anyone mapping their buildings was "morally wrong". Two others threatened to go online and wreck OpenStreetMaps, which might in fact be termed as vandalism. One poster stated that he was trying to get a piece of archaeology removed from maps because he didn't want anyone knowing it was there (!). Several posters claimed that regardless of laws there is a crime risk caused by maps, and though OpenStreetMap is only one such online map and others are there mappers have "no right" to place a building on a map without their permission. A poster claimed that he had contacted a different map provider to remove a public right of way that is on his land, using the Defamation of Title.

Phew, I hate summarising 😅 and yeah I'm biased because I found all that a bit mind-numbing.

My questions:

1. Is a building a private thing, in GDPR law? Could it give rise to PII?
2. Does tracing a satellite image taken from space require the consent of property owners under Irish law? I am asking because property laws may provide for that.
3. Does defamation of title include a fact being represented on a map, like "a barn is here", or "a public right of way is here", "a historic site is here".
4. Does anyone here know if maps have ever supported the perpetration of a crime? This is not "can maps support crime?", is there any evidence anywhere to prove this is happening, because I couldn't find any other than a link from the Farmers Journal saying it was a thing (no proof).

Easten

Luttrell you know my view on this but to add,

It is my view that something like a Machinery Shed on private property labelled on a Map as such does not indicate who the owner is, so it cannot infringe on the owners privacy rights. Now I'm open to be corrected on this but would like to hear the legal explanation so.

L1011

Anything built or changed in use post 1963 and actually compliant with planning is going to be in publicly available planning documents. Some counties have exceptionally old documents online, e.g. Kildare has them scanned patchily/with gaps back all the way to '63.

GM228

1. We don't have a concept of "private things" in GDPR, rather it works on the concept of personal data, a building can be private or public, but it does not give rise to any issue of personal data.

2. No.

3. You mean slander of title, not defamation of title, there would have to be malicious publication of false information which caused an actual financial loss to the property owner for any slander of title action.

4. There is no hard evidence of such, but I would be very surprised if they were not, in 2019 West Midlands Police issued an alert that criminals were using Google Maps and Street View:-

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/23/police-chiefs-tell-homeowners-demand-google-blurs-house-street/

Luttrell1975

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118307806#Comment_118307806

Thank you!

A building not being PII is what I argued in the other threads. I think people generally are unaware of the distinctions. Thanks 👍️

I wasn't sure about property rights that, I was wondering if you own the air and space over your property somehow.

Yes, I did mean slander of title😊. I was aware that it had to be malicious and could not be an error made in good faith or by "oversight". Isn't it also the case that any other detail if true would not be acceptable a tort under this law? So if you own a barn and a map says its a barn, tough luck.

I am not interested in "cans" or "mays". I want to know if any criminal goes to the bother of using a map, when he/she may find a gate, light, dog, alarm etc was installed and not captured on the 7 year old streetview used for my house. I still would love to see any evidence of it. This is the Telegraph after all... not a paper I trust.

Peregrinus

Well, of course a criminal could use a map. But he could use a paper map just as readily as an online map. And things are not illegal merely because a criminal could make use of them; if there were, crowbars would be very hard to buy.

Del2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118312951#Comment_118312951

Do paper maps tell them which is the shed with the valuable stuff? Having "machinery shed" highlighted on a map would make it easier for a potential thieve to know where to go. If they are casing 2 farms and the 1st has it's expensive property marked out and easy to find while the 2nd has stuff stored away securely they'll always hit the 1st. If they are looking for somewhere to rob they'll take the one where the casing has been done be good intentioned people, less chance of a local spotting a strange vehicle driving around.

Is it legal to highlight a buildings use, most likely. Is it a good idea to highlight a buildings use, most definitely not.

Peregrinus

Per the OP it was the landowner himself who labelled his own shed, so he can't really object to the labelling of the shed. Even if he later regrets doing it, he can't sue himself for doing it.

Presumably if he was able to add the label the system will allow him to alter or remove the label.

Luttrell1975

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118312951#Comment_118312951

Right, or a criminal could use public transport to get to the crime. This doesn't mean buses have to be banned 😁

Shilock

Interesting, I've old paper ordinance survey maps and books which show all the megalithic tomb's,ringforts and other interesting historical sites.

In a way I'm glad I held onto them,as there's Sheela na gigs and all kinds of carvings all over the country, some in plain sight but covered in lichen and ivy. They are better off hidden from people who have alterior motives or could possibly take them.

Luttrell1975

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118313750#Comment_118313750

Hate to bring you the news, but those things are published here. From what I read they are not all published yet.

https://maps.archaeology.ie/historicenvironment/