Airspace Privacy over your house !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Streisand's Silly Suit Sings Sour Song
Judge Throws Out Suit Against Pilot

Singer Barbra Streisand's lawsuit against a helicopter pilot
accusing him of violating her privacy was thrown out of court
Wednesday. Not only that, but she's going to have to pay Ken
Adelman's legal fees -- estimated somewhere in the six-figure
range.

Sweet.

"It was a clean sweep," Adelman (with wife and pilot
Gabrielle, above) said after the ruling. "We didn't win just
on a technicality, but on all the substantive issues. The judge
ruled that what we did was free speech and not an infringement of
privacy."

Adelman, a 39-year old Silicon Valley millionaire, takes the
pictures while his wife, Gabrielle, flies the R-44. The helicopter
was flown southeast-bound along the coast at altitudes ranging from
150 to 2000ft, but typically 500-700ft, depending on the terrain,
detail, and air traffic control constraints. The port-side rear
door was removed, giving the photographer an unobstructed view of
the coast.

Streisand sued Adelman for $50 million May
20th, after his website, which photographically traces
the California coast, published an aerial photograph of her estate.
The photographs were among about 12,700, many of which highlight
overdevelopment along the water's edge.

The lawsuit "sought to reaffirm that everyone should have the
right to retain their privacy, in their home, even in this
technologically invasive age," according to Streisand lawyer John
Gatti.

After the ruling, Adelman attorney Richard Kendall said Superior
Court Judge Allan Goodman sent a message: Environmental activists
have a right to fly where they want in public airspace and take
pictures of whatever they want. To have ruled any other way, said
Kendall, would have given the likes of Streisand "ownership" of
vistas and making them off-limits to photographers -- even from
several hundred feet above.

"That seemed absurd," Kendall said. "Many people familiar with
privacy law agreed with us that the case was not well-founded."

Wow. A lawyer with
common sense.

Gatti said Judge Goodman's ruling was a tentative one. "The
court's tentative decision found that intrusion occurred. But the
court failed to accord Ms. Streisand a remedy."

He said Streisand would wait to see the final ruling before
deciding whether to appeal. If she decides to continue the suit,
Judge Goodman ruled she would first have to reimburse Adelman for
his big-time legal expenses.

Here's the funny part: Streisand's suit actually caused her
mansion more exposure than if she'd just left the whole thing
alone. Since the suit was filed, Adelman's site got hundreds of
thousands of hits, whereas it was relatively obscure to the general
public before.

Does this mean Adelman has to send a thank-you note?

Adelman says he'll use the legal reimbursement to expand his
site. Already, he's posted thousands of aerial shots from the
1970s. He plans to fly the entire length of California again,
taking pictures to provide comparisons, sort of a then-and-now view
of the coastline. And, yeah, you can bet he'll shoot Streisand's
ranch again.
www.californiacoastline.org

"Fitzair4" wrote in message ...

Here's the funny part: Streisand's suit actually caused her
mansion more exposure than if she'd just left the whole thing
alone. Since the suit was filed, Adelman's site got hundreds of
thousands of hits, whereas it was relatively obscure to the general
public before.

Yep, this is what famed lawyer Louis Nizer used to warn his clients about.
His analogy is like having mud spashed on your overcoat. You can leave
it alone and it will dry and flake off, or you can start rubbing on it while it
is still wet, smearing it around and making a bigger mess.

In article ,
(Fitzair4) writes:



Streisand's Silly Suit Sings Sour Song
Judge Throws Out Suit Against Pilot

Singer Barbra Streisand's lawsuit against a helicopter pilot
accusing him of violating her privacy was thrown out of court
Wednesday. Not only that, but she's going to have to pay Ken
Adelman's legal fees -- estimated somewhere in the six-figure
range.

Sweet.


It couldn't have happened to a more deserving BITCH but I thought that we had
finally gotten rid of her in 2000 when Bush was elected. I seem to remember
her making a promise to leave the country if that happened.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"RobertR237" wrote in message
...
In article ,


It couldn't have happened to a more deserving BITCH but I thought that we
had
finally gotten rid of her in 2000 when Bush was elected. I seem to
remember
her making a promise to leave the country if that happened.

Bob Reed

Sheesh, Bob! How far away do you want her to go? She's already on her own
planet, right next to Red Ford's.

Rich S.

In article , "Rich S."
writes:


It couldn't have happened to a more deserving BITCH but I thought that we
had
finally gotten rid of her in 2000 when Bush was elected. I seem to
remember
her making a promise to leave the country if that happened.

Bob Reed

Sheesh, Bob! How far away do you want her to go? She's already on her own
planet, right next to Red Ford's.

Rich S.



Pluto! or beyond... ;-)


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

RobertR237 wrote:

It couldn't have happened to a more deserving BITCH but I thought that we had
finally gotten rid of her [Barbara Streisand] in 2000 when Bush was elected. I
seem to remember her making a promise to leave the country if that happened.

I have no love for Barbara Streisand, but her failure to follow through on that
(alleged?) promise merely puts her in the same classification as EVERY(*)
politician on the planet (including Dubya).

Russell Kent

(*) With a possible exception for our own Jim "One-buck" Weir. :-)

In article , Russell Kent writes:


It couldn't have happened to a more deserving BITCH but I thought that we
had
finally gotten rid of her [Barbara Streisand] in 2000 when Bush was
elected. I
seem to remember her making a promise to leave the country if that
happened.

I have no love for Barbara Streisand, but her failure to follow through on
that
(alleged?) promise merely puts her in the same classification as EVERY(*)
politician on the planet (including Dubya).

Russell Kent

(*) With a possible exception for our own Jim "One-buck" Weir. :-)



Yeah, I know but it doesn't keep one from hoping does it?


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Fitzair4 wrote:

Streisand's Silly Suit Sings Sour Song
Judge Throws Out Suit Against Pilot

Singer Barbra Streisand's lawsuit against a helicopter pilot
accusing him of violating her privacy was thrown out of court
Wednesday. Not only that, but she's going to have to pay Ken
Adelman's legal fees -- estimated somewhere in the six-figure
range.

Sweet.

"It was a clean sweep," Adelman (with wife and pilot
Gabrielle, above) said after the ruling. "We didn't win just
on a technicality, but on all the substantive issues. The judge
ruled that what we did was free speech and not an infringement of
privacy."

Adelman, a 39-year old Silicon Valley millionaire, takes the
pictures while his wife, Gabrielle, flies the R-44. The helicopter
was flown southeast-bound along the coast at altitudes ranging from
150 to 2000ft, but typically 500-700ft, depending on the terrain,
detail, and air traffic control constraints. The port-side rear
door was removed, giving the photographer an unobstructed view of
the coast.

Streisand sued Adelman for $50 million May
20th, after his website, which photographically traces
the California coast, published an aerial photograph of her estate.
The photographs were among about 12,700, many of which highlight
overdevelopment along the water's edge.

The lawsuit "sought to reaffirm that everyone should have the
right to retain their privacy, in their home, even in this
technologically invasive age," according to Streisand lawyer John
Gatti.

After the ruling, Adelman attorney Richard Kendall said Superior
Court Judge Allan Goodman sent a message: Environmental activists
have a right to fly where they want in public airspace and take
pictures of whatever they want. To have ruled any other way, said
Kendall, would have given the likes of Streisand "ownership" of
vistas and making them off-limits to photographers -- even from
several hundred feet above.

"That seemed absurd," Kendall said. "Many people familiar with
privacy law agreed with us that the case was not well-founded."

Wow. A lawyer with
common sense.

Gatti said Judge Goodman's ruling was a tentative one. "The
court's tentative decision found that intrusion occurred. But the
court failed to accord Ms. Streisand a remedy."

He said Streisand would wait to see the final ruling before
deciding whether to appeal. If she decides to continue the suit,
Judge Goodman ruled she would first have to reimburse Adelman for
his big-time legal expenses.

Here's the funny part: Streisand's suit actually caused her
mansion more exposure than if she'd just left the whole thing
alone. Since the suit was filed, Adelman's site got hundreds of
thousands of hits, whereas it was relatively obscure to the general
public before.

Does this mean Adelman has to send a thank-you note?

Adelman says he'll use the legal reimbursement to expand his
site. Already, he's posted thousands of aerial shots from the
1970s. He plans to fly the entire length of California again,
taking pictures to provide comparisons, sort of a then-and-now view
of the coastline. And, yeah, you can bet he'll shoot Streisand's
ranch again.
www.californiacoastline.org


Does anyone know what website her house photo is located?
Phil ..

"Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" wrote
in :

Fitzair4 wrote:

Streisand's Silly Suit Sings Sour Song
Judge Throws Out Suit Against Pilot

Singer Barbra Streisand's lawsuit against a helicopter pilot
accusing him of violating her privacy was thrown out of court
Wednesday. Not only that, but she's going to have to pay Ken
Adelman's legal fees -- estimated somewhere in the six-figure
range.

Sweet.

"It was a clean sweep," Adelman (with wife and pilot
Gabrielle, above) said after the ruling. "We didn't win just
on a technicality, but on all the substantive issues. The judge
ruled that what we did was free speech and not an infringement of
privacy."

Adelman, a 39-year old Silicon Valley millionaire, takes the
pictures while his wife, Gabrielle, flies the R-44. The helicopter
was flown southeast-bound along the coast at altitudes ranging from
150 to 2000ft, but typically 500-700ft, depending on the terrain,
detail, and air traffic control constraints. The port-side rear
door was removed, giving the photographer an unobstructed view of
the coast.

Streisand sued Adelman for $50 million May
20th, after his website, which photographically traces
the California coast, published an aerial photograph of her estate.
The photographs were among about 12,700, many of which highlight
overdevelopment along the water's edge.

The lawsuit "sought to reaffirm that everyone should have the
right to retain their privacy, in their home, even in this
technologically invasive age," according to Streisand lawyer John
Gatti.

After the ruling, Adelman attorney Richard Kendall said Superior
Court Judge Allan Goodman sent a message: Environmental activists
have a right to fly where they want in public airspace and take
pictures of whatever they want. To have ruled any other way, said
Kendall, would have given the likes of Streisand "ownership" of
vistas and making them off-limits to photographers -- even from
several hundred feet above.

"That seemed absurd," Kendall said. "Many people familiar with
privacy law agreed with us that the case was not well-founded."

Wow. A lawyer with
common sense.

Gatti said Judge Goodman's ruling was a tentative one. "The
court's tentative decision found that intrusion occurred. But the
court failed to accord Ms. Streisand a remedy."

He said Streisand would wait to see the final ruling before
deciding whether to appeal. If she decides to continue the suit,
Judge Goodman ruled she would first have to reimburse Adelman for
his big-time legal expenses.

Here's the funny part: Streisand's suit actually caused her
mansion more exposure than if she'd just left the whole thing
alone. Since the suit was filed, Adelman's site got hundreds of
thousands of hits, whereas it was relatively obscure to the general
public before.

Does this mean Adelman has to send a thank-you note?

Adelman says he'll use the legal reimbursement to expand his
site. Already, he's posted thousands of aerial shots from the
1970s. He plans to fly the entire length of California again,
taking pictures to provide comparisons, sort of a then-and-now view
of the coastline. And, yeah, you can bet he'll shoot Streisand's
ranch again.
www.californiacoastline.org


Does anyone know what website her house photo is located?
Phil ..




y'r kidding right??? look up :-) as in up above your message.... not
very far either

--
ET


"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 05:02:41 GMT, ET wrote:

Adelman says he'll use the legal reimbursement to expand his
site. Already, he's posted thousands of aerial shots from the
1970s. He plans to fly the entire length of California again,
taking pictures to provide comparisons, sort of a then-and-now view
of the coastline. And, yeah, you can bet he'll shoot Streisand's
ranch again.
www.californiacoastline.org


Does anyone know what website her house photo is located?
Phil ..


y'r kidding right??? look up :-) as in up above your message.... not
very far either
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Say ET....
It's perfectly OK to trim things down to a worthy...
rather than wordy, weighty and repetitive historic size.


Barnyard BOb -