Barbra Streisand Sues to Suppress Free Speech.

www.californiacoastline.org...
www.californiacoastline.org...
Read on, this is not a scientific study.

These people are full of self-importance. This is not even close to a valid study and does not even attempt to show concern for the privacy of the homes they are photographing. "We have little sympathy for those who would feel that in order to enjoy the beauty of the coast that they must deny others access to it." Then perhaps they should have been more active during the legislative process when shoreline property was voted to be sold to private homeowners. It's easy to be an "activist after the fact".

Here is a link to a valid effort:
www.ocrm.nos.noaa.gov...
$14 million dollars to fund 80 projects.

Ok, then, let's sue the NASA, ESA, NASDA and so on...Because they have all many satellites who can take very detailled pics of our homes.

Your satellite take a pic ? My house is on the pic ? Ok, I sue you.

It would be like moving, taking a picture of the house, then putting it on your web page. One problem, you catch the corner of your neighbors garage. Is that invasion of their property? It online, it part of their property, can they sue you for it?

"People. People who sue people. Are the..."
Well, I yield to no one in my admiration for La Streisand in her halcyon days; but I'm not entirely sure that the opininated old bat shouldn't have been diagnosed as certifiable purely on the basis of her movies and collaborating wth the Bee Gees.
However..something very similar has just resulted in an "intrusion" victory in Britain ( scarcely on the Streisand scale: a "disk jockey" with a thing called Radio 1 which is one of the many mechanisms employed by the bureaucrats, sycophants, and failed businessmen, who run the BBC, for wasting the licence fee).
I wonder if we are looking at some sort of backlash/bandwagon against the tabloids and the papparazzi.

I don't think its in any question whether or not any laws were broken, William's question eludes to is it moral to do it just because one can? Well, truthfully, its not. I'm also glad to see the link he posted concerning the federally funded program to combat this problem. I was just reading an article in "Erosion Control" magazine about mapping the greatlakes coastline in Michigan using LIDAR which for what I've seen is the best way to monitor such problems.

its just so very interesting to see someone with such environmental liberal leanings attack another entity in the same camp. I agree this study isn't the most scientific (Calicoastline) and may not even be ran by actual scientist. But in most activist groups, actual science isn't often the most concentrated on variable, politics is. I just can't help but think this would have been a non-issue had Babs not ran up the red flag which leads me to believe she isn't at all heartbroken about all the press she's gotten fom this. I just hope she's ready to take on any entity thats ever made a map using a sat photo or aerial photography of her area because California is home to ESRI, the king of GIS and you can bet her house is on countless other digital ortho photo quarter quadrangles. So, I'll let this go with that and I guess we'll all see what litigation results.

---original post removed as part of date correction repair---


Here's a link to an on-line article about LIDAR Technology that is currently the most efficient way to map shoreline erosion. I wonder if Babs would have a problem if they changed format to something more efficient like this?



"In the four years that LiDAR has been used commercially, it has proven to be a good solution for shoreline mapping for which ground access can be difficult, setting targets might prove impossible because of the water, and viewing aerial photos stereoscopically might not be an option because the ebb and flow of waves means every photographic exposure is different."

www.forester.net...

some body needs to slap the living # outta that bitch!

Well, it seems that Ms. Streisand's hypocrisy knows very little bounds. After having the case dropped by a judge, the court cost were awarded to the California Coast Line group. It now seems that Ms. Streisand is balking on paying the settlement as well as her legal fee (6 figures). Have no link as I heard the news on news radio but just like to follow-up on things when possible.