SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Niantic faces a class action lawsuit for encouraging trespassing on private property:
When Niantic released Pokemon Go, it randomly placed Pokémon, Pokéstops and Pokémon Gyms all over the world. Players of the game wander the real world and use smartphones to capture Pokemon, buy items and fight Pokemon Gym leaders.
"To create that immersive world, Niantic made unauthorized use of Plaintiff's and other Class members' property by placing Pokéstops and Pokémon gyms thereupon or nearby," said Jennifer Pafiti in the lawsuit. "In so doing, Niantic has encouraged Pokémon Go's millions of players to make unwanted incursions onto the properties of plaintiff, and other members of the class, a clear and ongoing invasion of their use and enjoyment of their land from which defendants have profited and continue to profit."
Due to the randomized placement of the Pokémon, Pokéstops and Pokémon Gyms, they have turned up in some unwanted locations such as in houses, cemeteries and museums. According to Jeffrey Marder, a man living in New Jersey, he received at least five unwelcome visitors that wanted access to his backyard to catch Pokémon within the first week of the game's launch.
"Plaintiff and other Class members have all suffered and will continue to suffer harm and damages as a result of Defendants' unlawful and wrongful conduct. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy," said Pafiti.
(Score: 2) by n1 on Wednesday August 03 2016, @03:39PM
The theoretical redneck who shoots kids because he got spooked by them wandering onto his land is not in the right, not valid self-defense from my perspective.
However, no one is in the right, if we have respect for private property, the idea of going wandering the labyrinth of privately owned physical property to search for digital widgets without the owners consent is not reasonably expected to happen.
I'll set up a nice sight seeing marathon/cycle race using google maps and an algorithm to generate a nice route and no fucks given about public rights of way or private land. Wont be my fault, or the participants when they are trespassing and damaging crops on farms. They didn't see the signs because they were too busy being social to notice they wern't on a public footpath or public/state park etc.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by VanessaE on Wednesday August 03 2016, @04:22PM
I don't disagree here, there are and ought to be societal norms and laws regulating this on both sides of the conflict, it's just that this whole thing with guns and shoot-to-kill and other forms of excessive force is ridiculous. As one article I read when looking up purple fences states, you're not likely to be harmed by a group of Girl Scouts dropping by to sell you some cookies (and if you force them to leave, you ought to be ashamed - Thin Mints ftw! :-) ).
In my opinion, it would be partially your fault, but only if you have reasonable access to data delineating private vs. public land, and you still allow your software to place objectives and waypoints too far into private land (that is, beyond the game's targeting or capture range when the player's standing on neighboring public land). Good luck to anyone who wants to sue you though, since they still have to prove monetary or other tangible damage. In practice, what's the worst that happens, on average? Some grass or a field trampled down in a few places, right? So, authorities need go after the kids (or parents thereof) to deal with any damage that's been done, just as it's always been. Meanwhile, you should be required (on penalty of a fine or something) to delete or move any offending objectives. If there's really nothing damaged that Mother Nature won't fix in short order, then everyone needs to just walk away after that. All of this applies equally to the Niantic case.
The players are responsible for their own behavior, of course, but kids being "too busy to notice" isn't any different now than it ever was. Kids will be kids, and wandering onto someone else's land while they're playing is nothing unusual in my experience, and has generally never been a cause for any particularly bad punishment. Kids, as a rule, don't care about or pay attention to signs and (open) fences and purple paint; they're focused on their game, and all they want to do at that moment is have fun. I'm pretty sure most kids don't have any particular desire to damage anything or hurt anyone in the process (though there's always that one kid who has to be a prick...).
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 03 2016, @05:17PM
"kids will be kids" - Kids are not the only ones playing this ridiculous game. Hopefully the game is only a fad and will fade away soon.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday August 03 2016, @06:01PM
In my opinion, it would be partially your fault, but only if you have reasonable access to data delineating private vs. public land, and you still allow your software to place objectives and waypoints too far into private land (that is, beyond the game's targeting or capture range when the player's standing on neighboring public land).
This is key.
Clearly these waypoints were placed by some algorithmic method, with no human involvement, and CLEARLY, not much in the way of respect for private property. I suspect they mined Google maps or Google Earth links. Those sources do contain ownership indicators for a large percentage of the world, and public indicators for just about every road and park.
And NO, I disagree with your exemption of responsibility just because the game maker asserts there is no "reasonable access to data delineating private vs public. You've got it exactly backwards. There is no place in any country that isn't owned by somebody, some authority, or some public entity. No place.
GeoCaching, which bills itself as The largest game on Earth, has clear rules [geocaching.com] about the location of a Geocache, and each such cache has a maintainer who is supposed to seek land-owner permission, maintain the cache, etc.
But Niantic took none of these precautions, and probably is liable for damages, actual property damage s, as well as loss of privacy, risk transference, and general nuisance.
Its not the same as some random neighborhood kid retrieving a ball from your flowerbed. Its a steady stream of strangers, (not all of them children) wandering your lawn at all hours for nothing at all.
Why cant Niantic shut down all off-road targets after dark? Why isn't there a "Pokemon go away app" with which you can draw a bubble around your property and push the targets toward the nearest public road or park?
When the Girl Scouts come on my property to sell me cookies, I'll probably buy some. If the set up a table to sell cookies at the end of my driveway, I'll probably let it slide, for an afternoon. When they show up tomorrow with their table and boxes, I'll shoo them away. But I won't have to, because the girl scouts are polite and would ask ahead of time. Niantic, not so much.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Informative) by curunir_wolf on Wednesday August 03 2016, @08:19PM
Clearly these waypoints were placed by some algorithmic method, with no human involvement
That may seem clear to you, but it is, in fact, completely incorrect. Niantic has been collecting those points, and the pictures of them via crowd sourcing (user submissions) through the Ingress game, for many years. When they first released the Ingress game, the vast majority of points (called "portals" in Ingress) were fire stations and libraries (because they were everywhere, in pretty every town, even small ones). Users were encouraged to find other points of interest to submit. Churches, fountains, monuments, stone historical markers and the like were the most likely types of portals to be approved. And that approval process took several weeks, so I'm quite sure they were reviewed by humans before the showed up in the game. They even have a place to appeal their decisions [google.com] if a portal submission is rejected.
In Ingress, there were people submitting portals that were in private property, but they were typically rejected. Some in private property accessible to the public were created (malls, lobbies of office buildings or large hotels, etc.), but it was very rare to see a portal on private property that was not a publicly accessible space.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by frojack on Wednesday August 03 2016, @08:43PM
The fact that pokemon players are darting over private lawns proves the lie in your claim.
What ever method they used, they clearly didn't vet their results against any official source.
Crowdsourced is a cop out. (And probable a false story anyway to avoid having to pay royalties to who ever provided their mapping data.).
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by curunir_wolf on Wednesday August 03 2016, @10:19PM
The fact that pokemon players are darting over private lawns proves the lie in your claim.
No it doesn't, and calling me a liar because of your own soaring ignorance is really rude. I suggest you rethink your response and issue an apology.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 3, Insightful) by art guerrilla on Thursday August 04 2016, @01:01AM
wtf?
um, BECAUSE it was crowdsourced, (OR WHATEVER THE FUCK) *that* makes it 'okay' ?
that makes less than zero sense...
oh, they curated the info... sure they did...
it may very well be it was screwed up before, but only since it was you and your buddy 'playing', nobody noticed...
now that -apparently- half the stupid fucking human race is 'playing' this idiotic thing, it is more noticeable...
and, NO, i DON"T want poketards -OR ANYONE- wandering over our property, up our private road, around our house, FOR ANY OR NO REASON...
EXACTLY why i live in the country, so i don't see my stupid neighbors, i don't hear a million loud nekkid apes, and my dogs have the run of the property...
and YES, in our neck of the woods, basically ALL (non-neighbor) pedestrians ARE suspicious: we live too far out for anyone to just 'wander' by here on a lark, or on the way to someplace else, just don't happen... we are on the way to nowhere, with no through streets, and no businesses or anything of any significance that attracts people to walk around here...
you got a flat tire/whatever, you will get more help than you can use; you lost a dog, we will all look; you need a phone 'cause yours died, of course...
but IF you are a (non-neighbor) walking out here, it is 'unusual' enough to garner automatic and justifiable suspicion you are up to no good...
(bear in mind we -and a LOT of neighbors- leave our houses unlocked when we go away for a week or more...)
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Thursday August 04 2016, @01:37AM
You called me a liar after I proved to you that Niantic staff personally vetting each and every location to ensure it's publicly accessible (among other TOS requirements), and STILL no apology? You're a dick. No wonder you live in the country, nobody would ever want to be around a fucking asshole like you. I feel sorry for the poor sod that has a flat tire near your precious wasteland, as you'll likely treat them like dog shit you scrapped off your shoe, like you have me.
shitass.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday August 04 2016, @05:43PM
You've proved nothing.
You've made a bunch of unsubstantiated claims of vetting, yet players still appear on private property chasing digital apparitions that SHOULD NOT BE THERE.
Where's your vetting now?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Friday August 05 2016, @03:19AM
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Friday August 19 2016, @01:51AM
wtf? part two
i didn't call you a liar, i don't even know what you are talking about, and i could not care less about the ins-outs of the stupid pokeshit or any other such claptrap, whether it was 'crowdsourced' (why not simply say 'its magic!'), or who vetted what for what...
given how weird you talk, i am perfectly fine with you categorizing me as a 'foe' (whatever that stupid shit means)...
WHOEVER was talking about how harmless it was to have poketards (or anyone, anytime?) wander over your PRIVATE property, whether by 'mistake' or not: THAT is the point i was responding to... peoples' (NOT JUST precious, PRECIOUS ME) PRIVATE property has certain rights over YOUR non-right to wander wherever you fucking feel like it... i respect YOUR right to have your private property respected, why don't you respect mine ? ? ?
AGAIN, someone has vehicle trouble/etc, people (including me, yep, based on a true story) will help them out without a second thought... but 'wandering around' out here just isn't a common phenomenon... we got more livestock than people, more limerock than paved roads, and more unwalkable miles between anywhere, so pedestrians kind of stick out... and if you add on to that insult that they are poketards doing *WHAT* the fuck exactly ? ? ? yeah, then it is just maddening on top of annoying...
and finally, i am glad that you approve of my absenting my asshole self from the asphalt rat's maze you oh-so-kind mammals choose to live in; for myself, i prefer trees and flowers and critters and stars and sun and rain and plants and dogs and wind and NO OTHER stupid shits around honking and yelling and boomboxing and screeching and peeling out and yakking and banging and clanging and sirening and revving and shouting and screaming and driving like they are the only person on the road...
yeah, don't really miss too much of that...
foe on, bitch...
(Score: 2) by cykros on Thursday August 04 2016, @04:25AM
False story? Considering the 3 portals nearest my house are with names I came up with and with pictures I took, I'm going to have to just shake my head over this doubt-for-the-sake-of-doubting claim.
And yea, 2 of the 3 of them are pokestops, the third is a gym. In Ingress, they even have the player name for who submitted them, and there was an achievement badge for approved new portal submissions.
As for Pokemon players darting over private lawns, it's worth noting that Pokemon, unlike Ingress, isn't all about the pokestops and gyms. The pokemon themselves move, for one, which invariably places them at times on private land. Beyond that, FINDING them is something that takes exploration, because unlike in Ingress, where any game object a player interacts with is right on a map for all to see, the Pokemon are only known to be more or less nearby, but any direction or coordinates are left out so as to encourage wandering around to deduce a position. I've personally yet to encounter a portal that cannot be legally accessed in 4 years of play, at least during certain hours (there are definitely some in cemetaries that do close at night, but it's generally understood, at least among Ingress players, that closed means closed. I'm not sure how much that holds true among the often younger demographic that is playing Pokemon Go).
Niantic should probably provide a more clear method for complaints about portals only accessible on private property, because it's unlikely that none slipped through the cracks in their vetting process. However, I'm not sure I'd go so far as to agree that any court should force them to do this, or frankly that they're legally in the wrong here to begin with. They've always been clear that trespassing is not in the spirit of gameplay, going back to Ingress's beta stage, and holding them accountable for what users of the apps they put out do is like holding football manufacturers responsible for the same type of behavior.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DECbot on Wednesday August 03 2016, @08:46PM
You are technically correct. What people don't connect is while the Pokestops and pokemon themselves may be mostly on public property, or publicly accessible property (a few exceptions due to algorithm imperfects), the players in an effort to reduce travel time, or while searching for valuable nearby pokemon, or even because of inaccurate GPS on their devices may deviate from public property and onto private lands.
So, even if Niantic did place all of its digital items perfectly, that doesn't stop the players from disregarding property laws. So, one, Niantic needs an easy means of remediation to remove spawn locations, gyms, and pokestops on the property owner's request; and two, people need to stop freaking out when they see people outside.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Wednesday August 03 2016, @10:16PM
So, one, Niantic needs an easy means of remediation to remove spawn locations, gyms, and pokestops on the property owner's request
You mean like THIS [nianticlabs.com]? It was the first result on a Google search.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by DECbot on Thursday August 04 2016, @03:08AM
So, myself, the media, and the property owners cited in the dozens of articles out there are uninformed. I wish there was a news outlet that reported links like this to keep the hysteria down. Right now the vibe I'm getting from the regular FUD sources is "The Pokemon Goers, they be walking alls over your private property taking your Pokemon! Think of the sex offenders! Think of the children! Think. of. the. children.... Outside! No body watching them! Getting fresh air and **GASP** ____walking!!! and even liking it!"
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 03 2016, @11:52PM
The kids on private property is the reason that "Rednecks" everywhere have Rock Salt. Good for warding off bad/dumb kids without killing them. Also good to protect the rednecks daughter from soon to be dead beat dads. Shotgun weddings for all! Do you know any "Rednecks?" I doubt it. If you would turn your "Stereo Type" down from 11 you might learn something. Do you know why a man has a Redneck? Do you have a job? Do you work your ass off all day long in the sun? Again; I doubt it. Drop your hate and try to understand people.
#RednecksLivesMatter