" To increase the likelihood of admissibility , however , it may be beneficial for litigants to provide ( 1 ) proof that the Google Earth program independently created the labels ( i . e ., timestamp ), which may be difficult to obtain from a practical standpoint ; or ( 2 ) a reliable witness to provide foundational testimony , which is particularly focused on the date and time reflected in the at-issue Google Earth image , rather than solely on whether the items in the image exist in the form depicted ." •
INDUSTRY IMPACTS
USING GOOGLE MAPS , DRONES , & OTHER TECH FOR PROPERTY REVIEW
Doing property " inspections " with technology like Google Earth , drone footage , or services that provide images / footage has become commonplace . However , there are concerns to take into account when relying solely on these sources for review .
In their " Viewpoint " study findings , JD Supra noted that issues have arisen in litigated claims ," Growing concern surrounding emerging technology that allows digital modification of online images has led some courts to apply evidentiary rules more stringently against parties seeking to rely upon Google Earth images ."
So , what does this mean ? It likely means that a secondary verification may be needed for things like condition and distance .
" If the purpose of the Google photo is more specific than confirming the general location or characteristics of a property – if , for example , the photograph is being used to identify a specific characteristic of land at a single point in time , or to measure the distance between the land and some other landmark – additional authentication may be required ."
Verifying the technology may also be problematic , and it is as important as ever to document , document , document . If you have personally obtained drone footage , photos , or other footage , make sure it corresponds with any other verification you ' re providing . Otherwise , admissibility may be an issue .
" To increase the likelihood of admissibility , however , it may be beneficial for litigants to provide ( 1 ) proof that the Google Earth program independently created the labels ( i . e ., timestamp ), which may be difficult to obtain from a practical standpoint ; or ( 2 ) a reliable witness to provide foundational testimony , which is particularly focused on the date and time reflected in the at-issue Google Earth image , rather than solely on whether the items in the image exist in the form depicted ." •
SOURCE : https :// www . jdsupra . com / legalnews / viewpointevidentiary-issues-with-9465776 /
40 KANSAS INSURANCE AGENT & BROKER