Ramping Up for 2007: Part 2

There is serious concern about the ways that GIS threatens privacy. Daniel Sui writes about what he calls Stolen Geography. I generally agree with his basic premise that technology is allowing more and more information about us to be used in ways that rob us of some funamental privacy and, in turn, robs us of our own private places. But I am troubled by the examples he uses in the column.

For instance, he highlights the use of aerial photography of Barbara Streisand's property as a new, technologically enabled way that people are violating her privacy. Yet, for decades, people have been able to fly over these same properties (at a safe altitude) and see what they could see. The ability to photograph it hasn't changed much at all. But the ability to publish it has changed, especially when you intersect the Internet with California's anti-paparazzi statute. That's the change. A similar change is the change in records about property ownership, which have always been a matter of public record.

I appreciate that California wants to protect their most treasured natural resource (celebrities) and I certainly appreciate that they are worried about inappropriate violations of privacy.

At least the photos, taken with an explicit public purpose in mind, are a private product. But the property data are a form of public records whose public accessibility is key to their purpose. How can you challenge your tax assessment or check property boundaries? How else can reporters and investigators look into tricky land deals? The transparency is important to establish the trust between the citizens and their government.