30 ms·

Why people keep trying to erase the Hollywood sign from Google Maps (2014)

370 points by c0riander 11y ago

ableal 11y ago
"Because our mapping services are now subject to the whims of angry, powerful residents, we have to rely on other sources to give us accurate directions. In a way, the post on my blog is almost like passing out hand-drawn paper cartography from person to person, a map to buried treasure that hangs in plain sight." Samizdat internet ... even literally, according to Britannica: '(from Russian sam, “self,” and izdatelstvo, “publishing”)'
- pfooti 11y ago
  Hmm, I always just thought it was a corruption of "same as that". I guess your way makes more sense. And yeah, I could have looked at wikipedia a long time ago.
adam-a 11y ago
I may be missing something, but why don't they build a car park and widen the road? Surely it's a lot easier than trying to stop people going to one of the most recognisable landmarks in the world. It's definitely worrying that major tech companies are willing to alter their maps at the request of a few wealthy individuals.
- de_Selby 11y ago
  Maybe it's not possible to get planning permission to build a car park because it's near a public park. It really does seem like there is an opportunity here that isn't being exploited though. Why doesn't someone start running tours up there? A couple of buses wouldn't cause a problem and there's money to be made from this.
  - shin_lao 11y ago
    At the end of the article it seems they are saying that a shuttle is currently being worked on.
- mahyarm 11y ago
  NIMBY psychology strikes again?
  - nefitty 11y ago
    "NIMBY (an acronym for the phrase "Not In My Back Yard"), or Nimby, is a pejorative characterization of opposition by residents to a proposal for a new development because it is close to them, often with the connotation that such residents believe that the developments are needed in society but should be further away."
    - morganvachon 11y ago
      Pejorative it may be, but it's accurate in this case. It was also used by the article's author. I'm normally one to champion a homeowner's rights to reduce trespassing, loitering, and destruction of property, and I do understand where the homeowners in this case are coming from. I have a little turd of a neighbor who revels in illegally driving his four wheeler across my yard but the police say I'm in a catch-22; unless they are camping out in my driveway waiting to catch him, they can't arrest him for it, and of course they don't have the resources to dedicate to that. He knows this of course, and rides by at random times, flipping me off if I'm outside at the time and tearing mud holes across the lawn. My point being, the folks in Hollywoodland who are threatening the author and coercing Google and Garmin are barking up the wrong tree. They should be seeking a solution that reduces traffic in their neighborhood without limiting the public's right to visit the park, and without threatening some guy who is already trying to do the right thing by steering tourists away from the neighborhood and towards the approved viewing areas. Just as I can't erect tire-gouging spikes in my yard or hire a thug to intimidate my neighbor into submission, these folks shouldn't be threatening people and illegally marking their curbs and signs to discourage tourists.
      - isaacdl 11y ago
        Small nitpick - why can't you erect tire-gouging spikes in your yard? It's your yard, is it not?
- serpentor 11y ago
  Because they are angry people. Angry!
  - spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
    Angry rich white people I would bet
- sschueller 11y ago
  Exactly, they could turn this into a beautiful destination with parking etc. Charge a small fee to pay for maintenance, close after 6pm. Everybody is happy.
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    Except people who want to visit at night. You know that'll happen.
    - kuschku 11y ago
      Then allow them to go at night and put some street lights up the trail. Also not impossible.
      - FireBeyond 11y ago
        The problem is not providing better access. That's what the populace might want. The residents, who are already happily interfering and obstructing, illegally at times, don't want that, and certainly don't want the idea of 'night access'.
        kuschku 11y ago
        The problem is providing better access without limiting access for the police or fire men. So you need to provide a parking lot and a dedicated trail to make sure people can reach their goal (seeing the sign in person) without going through the neighborhood itself.
  - FireBeyond 11y ago
    They could. But that's not the point for the residents. They don't want that, either. They want secluded peace. Next to a world famous tourist attraction. They don't want construction, they don't want traffic. They'd gate Hollywood Blvd if they could to stop people even getting up the first of the streets towards the sign.
- bcoates 11y ago
  It sounds like he's discussing some fire road that probably isn't practical to turn into a real road (this is steep, hilly terrain where most buildable space has been used) but there are reasonable places to park and hike like Griffith Observatory.
- deanclatworthy 11y ago
  They'd have to bulldoze private property and driveways to widen the roads in that area of the hills. Just try driving up to that area in GTAV :)
- ejk314 11y ago
  You do know that anyone can edit google maps, right? They don't block editing in a region until after something like this happens. https://www.google.com/mapmaker https://www.google.com/mapmaker
  - hartator 11y ago
    Can you edit this part?
- JBlue42 11y ago
  You are. The geography and neighborhood probably wouldn't allow for it and there are other nearby places to park and hike to the sign (if that's where people need to be). The shuttle idea is probably the best bet at the moment and the way it should be - the community and local gov't working together to solve issues rather than being petty, vindictive and somehow getting their way by having it changed on Google Maps as if it were a top secret military base and not just a pain in the ass to park.
smegel 11y ago
I've never been to LA, but now I know.
rmc 11y ago
OpenStreetMap, of course, has correct and accurate directions on how to drive or walk to the Hollywood sign. e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=34.1067%2C-118.3307%3B34.1341%2C-118.3216#map=14/34.1208/-118.3220 https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_...
- JDDunn9 11y ago
  At least until Google vandalizes it. http://www.wired.com/2012/01/osm-google-accusation/ http://www.wired.com/2012/01/osm-google-accusation/
  - matthewmacleod 11y ago
    Please don't spread this kind of FUD – even the article you linked to is much more measured. It's pretty silly to imply that there was any corporate action on behalf of Google aimed at vandalising OSM at the same time as the were sponsoring their annual conference.
    - schoen 11y ago
      I agree with your criticism, but I don't think sponsoring a conference is definitive proof of good will or alignment of interests. Some of the companies that sponsor Linux and FOSS conferences also take actions, for example in court, that are against the interests of those communities. Edit: I'm reminded of Thomas Schelling's notion of "incomplete antagonism" :-)
    - Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
      FWIW, I believe SOTM sponsorship came from Google's Open Source office rather than from Maps.
- bambax 11y ago
  I'm behind a very stupid and extremely annoying corporate wall (McAfee Web Gateway) that blocks OpenStreetMap, but not Google Maps...
rplnt 11y ago
> then—in something I’ve never seen before, anywhere on Google Maps—a dashed gray line arcs from Griffith Observatory, over Mt. Lee Uhm, Google Maps do this all the time if there is no route to the place you selected. I'd say I see it every time I use the routing feature by hand or by entering GPS coordinates, i.e. not when I write an address down.
- megablast 11y ago
  Another example would be great!
  - yaur 11y ago
    https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Liberty,+NY/Rocky+Mountain,+Shandaken,+NY/ https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Liberty,+NY/Rocky+Mountain,+... Of course unlike the Hollywood sign, this is a place you wont be able to get to without a good map and some back-country navigation skills.
  - Eiriksmal 11y ago
    It did the same dashed gray path when you asked it to route across oceans. The flights feature has removed that "feature," along with their quips about paddling across the Pacific in a canoe, if I recall their joking text correctly.
briandear 11y ago
Misleading the public doesn't solve the issue. I live inside the medieval walls of a historic French town and we are 'overrun' with tourists. However, despite some of them being rather inconvienient, it isn't like I have the right to shut down the street in front of my house to prevent the intrusive traffic that makes it difficult to even exit my garage. I knew about this 'issue' when I bought the house. And, even if I didn't, I don't own the city. It's a shared resource. It's the reason we elect local governments -- to prevent special interests from dominating an issue. Government isn't always effective, but in cases like these, it exactly the purpose of government. So instead of blocking a tourist 'trail,' folks on my little goat-path of a street appealed to the city to assist with enforcement of existing parking regulations. They even erected some barriers to prevent blocking my garage. However the tourists still have the freedom of access while still making it workable enough for residents. But blocking the street, breaking GPS or any other vigilante response wouldn't be appropriate because there are more interests in this town than just my own. The key is to work together to balance interests in a way that is reasonably harmonious. These Hollywood residents, blaming stuff such as a dog being squashed by a car on tourists are being a bit ridiculous. The dog was in the street. The fact that it was (allegedly) a tourist car that did it is irrelevant and is really just a cheap propaganda play. If the cars prevent fire trucks from access, that is something that could be handled at a city planning level and not by some residents that seem to think they are traffic engineers.
- pif 11y ago
  Hello, anyone caring to explain why this post is being downvoted?
  - rambambam 11y ago
    I was thinking the same. The text was pretty gray without any questions or comments on the content. I thought it was a good story, with solid arguments.
  - andy_ppp 11y ago
    The downvoting here has been ridiculous for a while now... I think posts with lots of upvotes and downvotes should be marked as interesting rather than bad. Or are we aiming for blandness here?
jschuur 11y ago
Reminds me of a recent video I watched about the copyright issues associated with the sign: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdQ7gxU6Rg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdQ7gxU6Rg
azernik 11y ago
The attempt to turn public property into the property of the locals reminds me of a similar, non-tech-related case, also in LA - Malibu beaches. According to the law of the state of California, all beaches are public property. Of course, this gets a bit complicated when an individual owns the land in front of the beach. The people who buy houses in Malibu would, of course, prefer to have a private beach section. So they put up gates and hire security guards (illegally), block public parking spots (either physically or by putting up counterfeit "no parking" signs), etc. They've historically gotten away with it because the enforcement agency is underfunded and the enforcement process is expensive (a separate civil lawsuit for each offender). That may change soon though: http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-coastal-penalties-20140630-story.html http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-coastal-penalties-20140...
- arethuza 11y ago
  I found an interesting here in Scotland not far from Edinburgh - there are some really nice beaches and a large estate with golf courses and high end housing immediately inland from the beaches. Between the beaches and the houses there is a very large green metal fence which stops all access from the properties to the beaches. My initial reaction was how unreasonable it was for the developers to build such a fence to keep people out of their development. Then I noticed that there are no gaps in the fence and, on doing some research, found out that the fence is there to keep the house owners off of the beach! I'd be a bit annoyed if I spent £1M on a house overlooking a lovely beach only to find that I'd have to walk/drive 8km or so to the other side of the fence...
  - huhtenberg 11y ago
    But what would be the reasoning for not having gates in this fence?
    - arethuza 11y ago
      The coast there is part of a protected "Site of Special Scientific Interest" (SSSI) and the beaches in question are sufficiently far from normal access points that they are remarkably quiet. A condition of the developer being allowed to build houses was apparently that this didn't improve access to the coastline - hence the fence. You can see it here: http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/102036 http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/102036 Edit: Keeping up my secret work for Visit Scotland - I can recommend the walk to the beaches from Dirleton: http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/lothian/dirleton-fidra.shtml http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/lothian/dirleton-fidra.shtml
adekok 11y ago
A large corporation accedes to the wishes of a rich elite, and helps them deny access to a public park? Say it ain't so... I wish there was some company around which had a motto of "Don't be evil". I'm sure that company would have done the right thing.
- Jgrubb 11y ago
  There was one once, a long time ago. Alas, they don't seem to have made it to the table in this current generation of large internet players.
- michaelt 11y ago
  Generally, the relationship between a map company and the local government isn't adversarial. If the government tells the map company "the speed limit of this road is x" or "this bridge has a height limit of y" or "this road is access-only for heavy trucks" then the map company will just take that as true. After all, if you can't trust the posted signs because of residents putting up fake signs, what is the canonical source of information on what's legal? If the local residents have got the local government to change the legal status of the roads, which is what the article makes it sound like, you can hardly blame Google for doing what the government tells them to do.
JustSomeNobody 11y ago
On the one hand I can kinda feel the pain of the homeowners. When my neighbor recently had a yard sale, I basically had to sit in my driveway telling people to not block it in case I had to get out. Some would actually try and argue with me. So, I know how selfish and stupid people can be sometimes. But, selfish and stupid works both ways. The homeowners near there can't deny people right of way on public streets. They can't put up fake signs/paint. This isn't right either. The best you can do is just try and keep the idiots off your own property.
- donatj 11y ago
  You couldn't just ask them to move if/when you did actually have to get out? People don't spend usually more than a few minutes at yard sales and it sounds to me like you were just being unreasonable. If you were so worried you might need to leave at an absolute moments notice (doctor on call or something?) why not just park in the street yourself?
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    Seriously? Look, it is plain rude to park directly in front of someone's drive. There's no two ways about that. I should not have to be go and park my car somewhere else because people can't be bothered to not be rude. I have plenty of property in front of my house that they could have parked (it's 25 extra feet they would have had to walk). That's what plenty of other people were doing. There's plenty of open space on the other side of the street as well.
    - donatj 11y ago
      Rude? Yes. An actual inconvenience to you? Unlikely.
      - Retra 11y ago
        Rudeness is an inconvenience.
HorizonXP 11y ago
So I have a story about this. Back in 2007, my friends and I were at a 4 month co-op internship at Qualcomm. One weekend, we decided to drive up to LA from San Diego. We drove as close as we could to the Hollywood sign, and got to a cul de sac where we saw a few cars parked, and a few families hiking down a hill from the sign. We parked, and walked up the hill, noticing a sign that said it was illegal to hike to the sign. We questioned whether it was a good idea to ignore the sign, but seeing as whole families were ignoring it, we thought it would be fine. We hiked for a few minutes, and then saw a security guard pull up in a car near our cars. I wasn't sure how legally I was parked, so we went back to avoid a ticket. The guard ignores all the families, and targets us, asking us what we were doing hiking up there. We said we just wanted a picture, and he yelled at us about the sign. We said we didn't see it, and he called us idiots. He asked to see our IDs, at which point, my friend started talking back, saying no way. Being that we were Canadian, and on work visas, I didn't want to push my luck, being a minority too. I knew that if this guard called the cops, I'd be in a bit more trouble, and I thought I'd be in jeopardy of getting shipped back to Canada. It didn't help that the friend mouthing back wasn't a minority; I don't think he realized how scared we are in general of cops. My friend kept mouthing off, saying that the guard had no right to talk to us like that, and we were going to leave. At this point, the guard says he's calling the cops, and that we have to deal with them. At this point, I jumped in, asked the guard to calm down, and that I'll talk to him privately. He told me to tell my friend to watch his tone, and I pleaded with him to let us go, since I really didn't want to deal with the cops over something minor on account of us not being American. He copied down my info from my license, gave us a warning, and let us go. Now, I did know my "rights", and I knew he had no grounds to detain us. But I didn't know those signs were fake, so I really thought we might be in trouble. Also, I didn't know if those rights applied to us as non-Americans. My friends said I was an idiot for giving my ID, and I agreed, but I just wanted to get out of there. I was 22 at the time too, so I probably was a bit more naive. Reading this article brought back this memory, and now makes me realize how we were bamboozled. Live and learn I suppose.
miclip 11y ago
Similar issue in Sausalito above the Bridge. Wolfback Ridge Rd is a publicly maintained road yet they have a gate and sign that says otherwise. It is strictly enforced by Sausalito Police on behalf of residents. There's some great short hikes up there that offer excellent views of the Golden Gate Bridge and headlands. Even google didn't dare go up there: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8512481,-122.4911711,3a,75y,263.37h,91.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8AcNzesT4PvEUxpLMGA0DA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8512481,-122.4911711,3a,75y,... Granted you can hike up Sunrise trail from the next exit but it's a tough hill for the elderly. Friend of mine got one of those hard to remove stickers put on their car for taking her mother up there. If you ask the city they'll spin crap but confirm that it's open to public when pushed for an answer. If you drive up there guaranteed someone will confront you and the police will show up soon after. Taxpayer funded gated community for the politically connected.
- cwyers 11y ago
  That's some bullshit. Wow.
- wanderingstan 11y ago
  Holy cow. Anyone want to organize a mass bike ride or hike there?
  - chillingeffect 11y ago
    I would join everyone, but given the stories I'm hearing, I wouldn't feel safe without afirearm ready and California has repealed open carry [ 1 ], so we'll just have to let this one go to the town. [ 1 ] http://www.shouselaw.com/open-carry.html http://www.shouselaw.com/open-carry.html
  - stevetursi 11y ago
    There are organized trail races in that area. Whenever I'm in the Bay Area I always look for races there. One of the most spectacular locales I've ever had the pleasure of being at. I'm always in the back of the pack but with those views, I don't mind so much. Example with photos from a race I did there in 2013: http://stevetursi.blogspot.com/2013/09/rr-san-francisco-50-mile-endurance-run.html http://stevetursi.blogspot.com/2013/09/rr-san-francisco-50-m...
chdir 11y ago
Reminds me of lombard street [1]. It can be pretty tiring for the residents to see a constant barrage of tourists, stopping their vehicles on the street to take pictures. Imagine leaving or returning home at "peak tourist hours", how difficult it would be to drive your car near your home. I guess the burden is on a home owner to figure out what they are walking into when they buy a house near a popular tourist attraction. Oh, and there's also the Martins Beach case [2]. [1] : https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lombard+Street/@37.802189,-122.418144,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1s442916!2e1!3e10!6s%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2Fproxy%2F_PY35bVZAGkyxeYY0BCF72LKnMgUBhpgBZda3pCd4PICkqvKXkYAk5Z707p0m9vza18L01loByAfO2sCNiXDDIVoAevnR-I%3Dw114-h86!7i2048!8i1536!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x10d3ce0ac1ec1299!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lombard+Street/@37.802189,... [2] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Billionaire-must-allow-public-to-access-Martins-5778533.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Billionaire-must-allow...
- Xcelerate 11y ago
  Come on... they're buying a house on Lombard Street. What do they seriously expect? It would be like buying one of the Painted Ladies and then complaining that everyone is taking photos of your house.
- knodi123 11y ago
  During one portion of the year, my neighborhood has small hordes of visitors due to a large wildflower field across the street. Mostly I find it charming, and my worst confrontation involved telling a guy "Hey, please don't park on my lawn", and him replying "oh, sorry, I'll move immediately". I don't see why seeing people taking pictures of a landmark in your neighborhood should be tiring.
  - smackfu 11y ago
    Usually it's because it has some impact on you. Like blocking your driveway, taking up all the parking, or leaving trash.
esac 11y ago
jbob2000 11y ago
I visited a few years ago and found the whole state of California was like this. "Shoo shoo dirty tourist, move along!". Locals upset and frustrated at tourists. Paris is like this too. I moved out of downtown Toronto for this reason; people coming and going with no respect for the locals who call it their home.
frogpelt 11y ago
Everybody hates tourists and it's hilarious. You live in a place that exists because of and is sustained by tourism and yet you hate all the people who come there and spend money. Here's an idea: move to a place that tourists don't like.
- maxerickson 11y ago
  I'm pretty sure the Hollywood Hills aren't leaning real hard on the tourism industry.
  - FireBeyond 11y ago
    I'd expect that a not-insubstantial portion of the residents of the Hollywood Hills have made their living/fortune directly or indirectly from the movie industry. That's neither here nor there. People want to see an attraction. It's on public parkland. The residents, whatever their motivation, do not have a right to prevent that. They could petition the city for better access (hell no, they won't do that), or policy change. Instead, they use connections and money to do things like: - illegally threaten tourists with the use of fake signs threatening civil or criminal sanctions - personally harass visitors - hire security guards who have been told to threaten people with trespass and arrest, illegally Just like David Geffen's famous 'fake driveway'. Amazing how everyone in Malibu knows that it's not a real driveway. That he had no right to paint the curb red or yellow indicating fire lanes, etc. The police know it. The towing companies know it. Yet, every week, they book, ticket, and tow someone who also knows it (there have been cases where people have parked there with a print-out of the whole saga pinned to their window, to prevent the usual story, which is "well, we know it's not real, but you didn't and you parked there, so you were ignoring the law"). My sympathies are ... lacking.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
ramisama 11y ago
does anybody know what's the current situation of this? I'm going to LA in a few weeks and I would like to know if I can get to see the sign.
- don_loemax 11y ago
  Just be kind and don't stand in the middle of beachwood ave blocking traffic grinning down the shaft of your selfie stick (you will see what I mean). I take friends up there all the time (to the trail under the sign) just be quiet and courteous and no one gets upset.
- alphaoide 11y ago
  I drove to the address 3204 Canyon Lake Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90068 mentioned in the article about 2 months ago. That's a really good spot I can recommend.
protomyth 11y ago
I have a lot of sympathy for people when some new things moves into their neighborhood and causes a disruption. On the other hand, I have about as much respect for these people, since the sign predates them, as I do for people who move next to farms and try to shut them down because of the smell. I think there is a special place in hell for people who alter data on public spaces.
cozzyd 11y ago
What does Apple Maps do?
- coolnow 11y ago
  It gives you directions to Hollywood, Worcestershire (UK).
don_loemax 11y ago
I live in Beachwood Canyon and I honestly don't mind the visitors, I think we forget we are a NYC stroll away from the hollywood strip and this is all part of being in a major city. The setting (quiet, tall trees and lush gardens and winding hilly roads and the absence of cell service) makes it easy to forget but we are still in the city and not some gated suburb.
ant6n 11y ago
How about they just create an official parking lot that has a good view of the sign for the tourists, to funnel them all there.
logfromblammo 11y ago
I have to wonder why more residents aren't trying to milk money out of the tourists. Isn't that what is supposed to happen around every tourist attraction? If I lived there, I might just pave a few extra parking spaces into my property and charge $5 for first 30 minutes and $5 each additional 60 minutes thereafter. Buy lemonade, hiking maps, souvenir magnets, and postcards from the kiosk. 10%-off coupons for checking in on social media. Hey! Hey! Hey mister; hey lady! You wanna buy Hollywood Sign t-shirt? Hollywood Sign keychain fob? How about shopped photo with your name in place of the real sign? Don't just take selfies! Everybody takes selfies! Buy something no one else has; buy this volume-printed diorama of the sign and surrounding park, signed by the artist! Limited edition! Whenever I have been a tourist, the single best way to make me want to leave and never return is to subject me to a continuous barrage of sales pitches for useless attraction-related crap. Example: every square centimeter of Disney World. That's like the ultimate goal of merchandising, when it all sort of collapses into this state where everything becomes an advertisement for itself, and everything you buy subtly encourages you to buy more, or maybe just put all your cash in a paper envelope and deposit it into a slot under the Walt and Mickey statue. That's how you ruin an attraction. You don't just make it secret and exclusive; that only makes people want it more. Instead, you relentlessly try to squeeze every last drop of money out of it. If you really want the people to stop coming, your Holy Grail is the online review that says, "Not worth the $10 parking space in some guy's front yard. Locals aggressively sell touristy crap, and the sign itself seems kind of cheap and pathetic from up close." Of course, the downside is that unless you have some sort of "identify friend or foe" system in place, you get a dozen sales pitches every time you walk from your own driveway to your own house.
- lordnacho 11y ago
  This is a brilliant post! I love the idea of scaring away tourists by making it more touristy.
- HelloMcFly 11y ago
  The people that own those houses have enough money that it isn't worth the time investment to make a little extra cash, even if the side benefit it ruining the experience. That's a hell of a time commitment.
scelerat 11y ago
The recommendation to go to Lake Hollywood for a view of the sign instead is an odd one. The access road to the reservoir is even more twisty and narrow than Beachwood Canyon.
lips 11y ago
And they can't rent bikes, create a locally-staffed concession area, sell tchotkes, and pull some $$$ out of the tourists? Tourists gonna tourist, and might as well beat them at their own game, and put the money back into trail infrastructure, and then take the cream off the top for local services.
jarsin 11y ago
Why is it in our society threatening to sue someone doing nothing wrong is not considered the same as a violent threat? Whats the difference between that homeowner saying "hey i am going to break your kneecaps" vs "hey I have more money than you and am going to destroy your life with legal action." - which is what he was implying in his email
- skj 11y ago
  Threatening to sue (or actually suing) is by definition never something that has legal consequences in this country. Law suits are the way of saying "We cannot agree, the state shall decide". It so happens that money can unfairly influence the state, but that is the problem, not people threatening to sue.
- DanBC 11y ago
  It depends who's doing the threatening and why. http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/barrister-loses-misconduct-appeal-after-threatening-to-sue-dentist/5051670.article http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/barrister-loses-misconduct-...
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Why is it in our society threatening to sue someone doing nothing wrong is not considered the same as a violent threat? Because it isn't a threat of violence. OTOH, it can be an unlawful threat, as, e.g., extortion. [1] [1] http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2009/hynes101.pdf http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2009/hynes101...
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    Every law is backed by violence. A threat of legal action is a threat of violence, even if it is delayed. So instead of breaking knee caps, it is more like threatening to get a person who may charge them $500 and if they don't pay, then break their knee caps. There is a chance they won't do anything, but it is still a threat of violence.
    - 11y ago

370 points by c0riander 11y ago

"Because our mapping services are now subject to the whims of angry, powerful residents, we have to rely on other sources to give us accurate directions. In a way, the post on my blog is almost like passing out hand-drawn paper cartography from person to person, a map to buried treasure that hangs in plain sight." Samizdat internet ... even literally, according to Britannica: '(from Russian sam, “self,” and izdatelstvo, “publishing”)'

pfooti 11y ago
Hmm, I always just thought it was a corruption of "same as that". I guess your way makes more sense. And yeah, I could have looked at wikipedia a long time ago.

adam-a 11y ago

I may be missing something, but why don't they build a car park and widen the road? Surely it's a lot easier than trying to stop people going to one of the most recognisable landmarks in the world. It's definitely worrying that major tech companies are willing to alter their maps at the request of a few wealthy individuals.

de_Selby 11y ago
Maybe it's not possible to get planning permission to build a car park because it's near a public park. It really does seem like there is an opportunity here that isn't being exploited though. Why doesn't someone start running tours up there? A couple of buses wouldn't cause a problem and there's money to be made from this.
- shin_lao 11y ago
  At the end of the article it seems they are saying that a shuttle is currently being worked on.
mahyarm 11y ago
NIMBY psychology strikes again?
- nefitty 11y ago
  "NIMBY (an acronym for the phrase "Not In My Back Yard"), or Nimby, is a pejorative characterization of opposition by residents to a proposal for a new development because it is close to them, often with the connotation that such residents believe that the developments are needed in society but should be further away."
  - morganvachon 11y ago
    Pejorative it may be, but it's accurate in this case. It was also used by the article's author. I'm normally one to champion a homeowner's rights to reduce trespassing, loitering, and destruction of property, and I do understand where the homeowners in this case are coming from. I have a little turd of a neighbor who revels in illegally driving his four wheeler across my yard but the police say I'm in a catch-22; unless they are camping out in my driveway waiting to catch him, they can't arrest him for it, and of course they don't have the resources to dedicate to that. He knows this of course, and rides by at random times, flipping me off if I'm outside at the time and tearing mud holes across the lawn. My point being, the folks in Hollywoodland who are threatening the author and coercing Google and Garmin are barking up the wrong tree. They should be seeking a solution that reduces traffic in their neighborhood without limiting the public's right to visit the park, and without threatening some guy who is already trying to do the right thing by steering tourists away from the neighborhood and towards the approved viewing areas. Just as I can't erect tire-gouging spikes in my yard or hire a thug to intimidate my neighbor into submission, these folks shouldn't be threatening people and illegally marking their curbs and signs to discourage tourists.
    - isaacdl 11y ago
      Small nitpick - why can't you erect tire-gouging spikes in your yard? It's your yard, is it not?
serpentor 11y ago
Because they are angry people. Angry!
- spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
  Angry rich white people I would bet
sschueller 11y ago
Exactly, they could turn this into a beautiful destination with parking etc. Charge a small fee to pay for maintenance, close after 6pm. Everybody is happy.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  Except people who want to visit at night. You know that'll happen.
  - kuschku 11y ago
    Then allow them to go at night and put some street lights up the trail. Also not impossible.
    - FireBeyond 11y ago
      The problem is not providing better access. That's what the populace might want. The residents, who are already happily interfering and obstructing, illegally at times, don't want that, and certainly don't want the idea of 'night access'.
      - kuschku 11y ago
        The problem is providing better access without limiting access for the police or fire men. So you need to provide a parking lot and a dedicated trail to make sure people can reach their goal (seeing the sign in person) without going through the neighborhood itself.
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  They could. But that's not the point for the residents. They don't want that, either. They want secluded peace. Next to a world famous tourist attraction. They don't want construction, they don't want traffic. They'd gate Hollywood Blvd if they could to stop people even getting up the first of the streets towards the sign.
bcoates 11y ago
It sounds like he's discussing some fire road that probably isn't practical to turn into a real road (this is steep, hilly terrain where most buildable space has been used) but there are reasonable places to park and hike like Griffith Observatory.
deanclatworthy 11y ago
They'd have to bulldoze private property and driveways to widen the roads in that area of the hills. Just try driving up to that area in GTAV :)
ejk314 11y ago
You do know that anyone can edit google maps, right? They don't block editing in a region until after something like this happens. https://www.google.com/mapmaker https://www.google.com/mapmaker
- hartator 11y ago
  Can you edit this part?
JBlue42 11y ago
You are. The geography and neighborhood probably wouldn't allow for it and there are other nearby places to park and hike to the sign (if that's where people need to be). The shuttle idea is probably the best bet at the moment and the way it should be - the community and local gov't working together to solve issues rather than being petty, vindictive and somehow getting their way by having it changed on Google Maps as if it were a top secret military base and not just a pain in the ass to park.

smegel 11y ago

I've never been to LA, but now I know.

rmc 11y ago

OpenStreetMap, of course, has correct and accurate directions on how to drive or walk to the Hollywood sign. e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=34.1067%2C-118.3307%3B34.1341%2C-118.3216#map=14/34.1208/-118.3220 https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_...

JDDunn9 11y ago
At least until Google vandalizes it. http://www.wired.com/2012/01/osm-google-accusation/ http://www.wired.com/2012/01/osm-google-accusation/
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  Please don't spread this kind of FUD – even the article you linked to is much more measured. It's pretty silly to imply that there was any corporate action on behalf of Google aimed at vandalising OSM at the same time as the were sponsoring their annual conference.
  - schoen 11y ago
    I agree with your criticism, but I don't think sponsoring a conference is definitive proof of good will or alignment of interests. Some of the companies that sponsor Linux and FOSS conferences also take actions, for example in court, that are against the interests of those communities. Edit: I'm reminded of Thomas Schelling's notion of "incomplete antagonism" :-)
  - Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
    FWIW, I believe SOTM sponsorship came from Google's Open Source office rather than from Maps.
bambax 11y ago
I'm behind a very stupid and extremely annoying corporate wall (McAfee Web Gateway) that blocks OpenStreetMap, but not Google Maps...

rplnt 11y ago

> then—in something I’ve never seen before, anywhere on Google Maps—a dashed gray line arcs from Griffith Observatory, over Mt. Lee Uhm, Google Maps do this all the time if there is no route to the place you selected. I'd say I see it every time I use the routing feature by hand or by entering GPS coordinates, i.e. not when I write an address down.

megablast 11y ago
Another example would be great!
- yaur 11y ago
  https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Liberty,+NY/Rocky+Mountain,+Shandaken,+NY/ https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Liberty,+NY/Rocky+Mountain,+... Of course unlike the Hollywood sign, this is a place you wont be able to get to without a good map and some back-country navigation skills.
- Eiriksmal 11y ago
  It did the same dashed gray path when you asked it to route across oceans. The flights feature has removed that "feature," along with their quips about paddling across the Pacific in a canoe, if I recall their joking text correctly.

briandear 11y ago

Misleading the public doesn't solve the issue. I live inside the medieval walls of a historic French town and we are 'overrun' with tourists. However, despite some of them being rather inconvienient, it isn't like I have the right to shut down the street in front of my house to prevent the intrusive traffic that makes it difficult to even exit my garage. I knew about this 'issue' when I bought the house. And, even if I didn't, I don't own the city. It's a shared resource. It's the reason we elect local governments -- to prevent special interests from dominating an issue. Government isn't always effective, but in cases like these, it exactly the purpose of government. So instead of blocking a tourist 'trail,' folks on my little goat-path of a street appealed to the city to assist with enforcement of existing parking regulations. They even erected some barriers to prevent blocking my garage. However the tourists still have the freedom of access while still making it workable enough for residents. But blocking the street, breaking GPS or any other vigilante response wouldn't be appropriate because there are more interests in this town than just my own. The key is to work together to balance interests in a way that is reasonably harmonious. These Hollywood residents, blaming stuff such as a dog being squashed by a car on tourists are being a bit ridiculous. The dog was in the street. The fact that it was (allegedly) a tourist car that did it is irrelevant and is really just a cheap propaganda play. If the cars prevent fire trucks from access, that is something that could be handled at a city planning level and not by some residents that seem to think they are traffic engineers.

pif 11y ago
Hello, anyone caring to explain why this post is being downvoted?
- rambambam 11y ago
  I was thinking the same. The text was pretty gray without any questions or comments on the content. I thought it was a good story, with solid arguments.
- andy_ppp 11y ago
  The downvoting here has been ridiculous for a while now... I think posts with lots of upvotes and downvotes should be marked as interesting rather than bad. Or are we aiming for blandness here?

jschuur 11y ago

Reminds me of a recent video I watched about the copyright issues associated with the sign: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdQ7gxU6Rg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdQ7gxU6Rg

azernik 11y ago

The attempt to turn public property into the property of the locals reminds me of a similar, non-tech-related case, also in LA - Malibu beaches. According to the law of the state of California, all beaches are public property. Of course, this gets a bit complicated when an individual owns the land in front of the beach. The people who buy houses in Malibu would, of course, prefer to have a private beach section. So they put up gates and hire security guards (illegally), block public parking spots (either physically or by putting up counterfeit "no parking" signs), etc. They've historically gotten away with it because the enforcement agency is underfunded and the enforcement process is expensive (a separate civil lawsuit for each offender). That may change soon though: http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-coastal-penalties-20140630-story.html http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-coastal-penalties-20140...

arethuza 11y ago
I found an interesting here in Scotland not far from Edinburgh - there are some really nice beaches and a large estate with golf courses and high end housing immediately inland from the beaches. Between the beaches and the houses there is a very large green metal fence which stops all access from the properties to the beaches. My initial reaction was how unreasonable it was for the developers to build such a fence to keep people out of their development. Then I noticed that there are no gaps in the fence and, on doing some research, found out that the fence is there to keep the house owners off of the beach! I'd be a bit annoyed if I spent £1M on a house overlooking a lovely beach only to find that I'd have to walk/drive 8km or so to the other side of the fence...
- huhtenberg 11y ago
  But what would be the reasoning for not having gates in this fence?
  - arethuza 11y ago
    The coast there is part of a protected "Site of Special Scientific Interest" (SSSI) and the beaches in question are sufficiently far from normal access points that they are remarkably quiet. A condition of the developer being allowed to build houses was apparently that this didn't improve access to the coastline - hence the fence. You can see it here: http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/102036 http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/102036 Edit: Keeping up my secret work for Visit Scotland - I can recommend the walk to the beaches from Dirleton: http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/lothian/dirleton-fidra.shtml http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/lothian/dirleton-fidra.shtml

adekok 11y ago

A large corporation accedes to the wishes of a rich elite, and helps them deny access to a public park? Say it ain't so... I wish there was some company around which had a motto of "Don't be evil". I'm sure that company would have done the right thing.

Jgrubb 11y ago
There was one once, a long time ago. Alas, they don't seem to have made it to the table in this current generation of large internet players.
michaelt 11y ago
Generally, the relationship between a map company and the local government isn't adversarial. If the government tells the map company "the speed limit of this road is x" or "this bridge has a height limit of y" or "this road is access-only for heavy trucks" then the map company will just take that as true. After all, if you can't trust the posted signs because of residents putting up fake signs, what is the canonical source of information on what's legal? If the local residents have got the local government to change the legal status of the roads, which is what the article makes it sound like, you can hardly blame Google for doing what the government tells them to do.

JustSomeNobody 11y ago

On the one hand I can kinda feel the pain of the homeowners. When my neighbor recently had a yard sale, I basically had to sit in my driveway telling people to not block it in case I had to get out. Some would actually try and argue with me. So, I know how selfish and stupid people can be sometimes. But, selfish and stupid works both ways. The homeowners near there can't deny people right of way on public streets. They can't put up fake signs/paint. This isn't right either. The best you can do is just try and keep the idiots off your own property.

donatj 11y ago
You couldn't just ask them to move if/when you did actually have to get out? People don't spend usually more than a few minutes at yard sales and it sounds to me like you were just being unreasonable. If you were so worried you might need to leave at an absolute moments notice (doctor on call or something?) why not just park in the street yourself?
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  Seriously? Look, it is plain rude to park directly in front of someone's drive. There's no two ways about that. I should not have to be go and park my car somewhere else because people can't be bothered to not be rude. I have plenty of property in front of my house that they could have parked (it's 25 extra feet they would have had to walk). That's what plenty of other people were doing. There's plenty of open space on the other side of the street as well.
  - donatj 11y ago
    Rude? Yes. An actual inconvenience to you? Unlikely.
    - Retra 11y ago
      Rudeness is an inconvenience.

HorizonXP 11y ago

So I have a story about this. Back in 2007, my friends and I were at a 4 month co-op internship at Qualcomm. One weekend, we decided to drive up to LA from San Diego. We drove as close as we could to the Hollywood sign, and got to a cul de sac where we saw a few cars parked, and a few families hiking down a hill from the sign. We parked, and walked up the hill, noticing a sign that said it was illegal to hike to the sign. We questioned whether it was a good idea to ignore the sign, but seeing as whole families were ignoring it, we thought it would be fine. We hiked for a few minutes, and then saw a security guard pull up in a car near our cars. I wasn't sure how legally I was parked, so we went back to avoid a ticket. The guard ignores all the families, and targets us, asking us what we were doing hiking up there. We said we just wanted a picture, and he yelled at us about the sign. We said we didn't see it, and he called us idiots. He asked to see our IDs, at which point, my friend started talking back, saying no way. Being that we were Canadian, and on work visas, I didn't want to push my luck, being a minority too. I knew that if this guard called the cops, I'd be in a bit more trouble, and I thought I'd be in jeopardy of getting shipped back to Canada. It didn't help that the friend mouthing back wasn't a minority; I don't think he realized how scared we are in general of cops. My friend kept mouthing off, saying that the guard had no right to talk to us like that, and we were going to leave. At this point, the guard says he's calling the cops, and that we have to deal with them. At this point, I jumped in, asked the guard to calm down, and that I'll talk to him privately. He told me to tell my friend to watch his tone, and I pleaded with him to let us go, since I really didn't want to deal with the cops over something minor on account of us not being American. He copied down my info from my license, gave us a warning, and let us go. Now, I did know my "rights", and I knew he had no grounds to detain us. But I didn't know those signs were fake, so I really thought we might be in trouble. Also, I didn't know if those rights applied to us as non-Americans. My friends said I was an idiot for giving my ID, and I agreed, but I just wanted to get out of there. I was 22 at the time too, so I probably was a bit more naive. Reading this article brought back this memory, and now makes me realize how we were bamboozled. Live and learn I suppose.

miclip 11y ago

Similar issue in Sausalito above the Bridge. Wolfback Ridge Rd is a publicly maintained road yet they have a gate and sign that says otherwise. It is strictly enforced by Sausalito Police on behalf of residents. There's some great short hikes up there that offer excellent views of the Golden Gate Bridge and headlands. Even google didn't dare go up there: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8512481,-122.4911711,3a,75y,263.37h,91.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8AcNzesT4PvEUxpLMGA0DA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8512481,-122.4911711,3a,75y,... Granted you can hike up Sunrise trail from the next exit but it's a tough hill for the elderly. Friend of mine got one of those hard to remove stickers put on their car for taking her mother up there. If you ask the city they'll spin crap but confirm that it's open to public when pushed for an answer. If you drive up there guaranteed someone will confront you and the police will show up soon after. Taxpayer funded gated community for the politically connected.

cwyers 11y ago
That's some bullshit. Wow.
wanderingstan 11y ago
Holy cow. Anyone want to organize a mass bike ride or hike there?
- chillingeffect 11y ago
  I would join everyone, but given the stories I'm hearing, I wouldn't feel safe without afirearm ready and California has repealed open carry [ 1 ], so we'll just have to let this one go to the town. [ 1 ] http://www.shouselaw.com/open-carry.html http://www.shouselaw.com/open-carry.html
- stevetursi 11y ago
  There are organized trail races in that area. Whenever I'm in the Bay Area I always look for races there. One of the most spectacular locales I've ever had the pleasure of being at. I'm always in the back of the pack but with those views, I don't mind so much. Example with photos from a race I did there in 2013: http://stevetursi.blogspot.com/2013/09/rr-san-francisco-50-mile-endurance-run.html http://stevetursi.blogspot.com/2013/09/rr-san-francisco-50-m...

chdir 11y ago

Reminds me of lombard street [1]. It can be pretty tiring for the residents to see a constant barrage of tourists, stopping their vehicles on the street to take pictures. Imagine leaving or returning home at "peak tourist hours", how difficult it would be to drive your car near your home. I guess the burden is on a home owner to figure out what they are walking into when they buy a house near a popular tourist attraction. Oh, and there's also the Martins Beach case [2]. [1] : https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lombard+Street/@37.802189,-122.418144,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1s442916!2e1!3e10!6s%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2Fproxy%2F_PY35bVZAGkyxeYY0BCF72LKnMgUBhpgBZda3pCd4PICkqvKXkYAk5Z707p0m9vza18L01loByAfO2sCNiXDDIVoAevnR-I%3Dw114-h86!7i2048!8i1536!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x10d3ce0ac1ec1299!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lombard+Street/@37.802189,... [2] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Billionaire-must-allow-public-to-access-Martins-5778533.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Billionaire-must-allow...

Xcelerate 11y ago
Come on... they're buying a house on Lombard Street. What do they seriously expect? It would be like buying one of the Painted Ladies and then complaining that everyone is taking photos of your house.
knodi123 11y ago
During one portion of the year, my neighborhood has small hordes of visitors due to a large wildflower field across the street. Mostly I find it charming, and my worst confrontation involved telling a guy "Hey, please don't park on my lawn", and him replying "oh, sorry, I'll move immediately". I don't see why seeing people taking pictures of a landmark in your neighborhood should be tiring.
- smackfu 11y ago
  Usually it's because it has some impact on you. Like blocking your driveway, taking up all the parking, or leaving trash.

esac 11y ago

jbob2000 11y ago

I visited a few years ago and found the whole state of California was like this. "Shoo shoo dirty tourist, move along!". Locals upset and frustrated at tourists. Paris is like this too. I moved out of downtown Toronto for this reason; people coming and going with no respect for the locals who call it their home.

frogpelt 11y ago

Everybody hates tourists and it's hilarious. You live in a place that exists because of and is sustained by tourism and yet you hate all the people who come there and spend money. Here's an idea: move to a place that tourists don't like.

maxerickson 11y ago
I'm pretty sure the Hollywood Hills aren't leaning real hard on the tourism industry.
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  I'd expect that a not-insubstantial portion of the residents of the Hollywood Hills have made their living/fortune directly or indirectly from the movie industry. That's neither here nor there. People want to see an attraction. It's on public parkland. The residents, whatever their motivation, do not have a right to prevent that. They could petition the city for better access (hell no, they won't do that), or policy change. Instead, they use connections and money to do things like: - illegally threaten tourists with the use of fake signs threatening civil or criminal sanctions - personally harass visitors - hire security guards who have been told to threaten people with trespass and arrest, illegally Just like David Geffen's famous 'fake driveway'. Amazing how everyone in Malibu knows that it's not a real driveway. That he had no right to paint the curb red or yellow indicating fire lanes, etc. The police know it. The towing companies know it. Yet, every week, they book, ticket, and tow someone who also knows it (there have been cases where people have parked there with a print-out of the whole saga pinned to their window, to prevent the usual story, which is "well, we know it's not real, but you didn't and you parked there, so you were ignoring the law"). My sympathies are ... lacking.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

ramisama 11y ago

does anybody know what's the current situation of this? I'm going to LA in a few weeks and I would like to know if I can get to see the sign.

don_loemax 11y ago
Just be kind and don't stand in the middle of beachwood ave blocking traffic grinning down the shaft of your selfie stick (you will see what I mean). I take friends up there all the time (to the trail under the sign) just be quiet and courteous and no one gets upset.
alphaoide 11y ago
I drove to the address 3204 Canyon Lake Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90068 mentioned in the article about 2 months ago. That's a really good spot I can recommend.

protomyth 11y ago

I have a lot of sympathy for people when some new things moves into their neighborhood and causes a disruption. On the other hand, I have about as much respect for these people, since the sign predates them, as I do for people who move next to farms and try to shut them down because of the smell. I think there is a special place in hell for people who alter data on public spaces.

cozzyd 11y ago

What does Apple Maps do?

coolnow 11y ago
It gives you directions to Hollywood, Worcestershire (UK).

don_loemax 11y ago

I live in Beachwood Canyon and I honestly don't mind the visitors, I think we forget we are a NYC stroll away from the hollywood strip and this is all part of being in a major city. The setting (quiet, tall trees and lush gardens and winding hilly roads and the absence of cell service) makes it easy to forget but we are still in the city and not some gated suburb.

ant6n 11y ago

How about they just create an official parking lot that has a good view of the sign for the tourists, to funnel them all there.

logfromblammo 11y ago

I have to wonder why more residents aren't trying to milk money out of the tourists. Isn't that what is supposed to happen around every tourist attraction? If I lived there, I might just pave a few extra parking spaces into my property and charge $5 for first 30 minutes and $5 each additional 60 minutes thereafter. Buy lemonade, hiking maps, souvenir magnets, and postcards from the kiosk. 10%-off coupons for checking in on social media. Hey! Hey! Hey mister; hey lady! You wanna buy Hollywood Sign t-shirt? Hollywood Sign keychain fob? How about shopped photo with your name in place of the real sign? Don't just take selfies! Everybody takes selfies! Buy something no one else has; buy this volume-printed diorama of the sign and surrounding park, signed by the artist! Limited edition! Whenever I have been a tourist, the single best way to make me want to leave and never return is to subject me to a continuous barrage of sales pitches for useless attraction-related crap. Example: every square centimeter of Disney World. That's like the ultimate goal of merchandising, when it all sort of collapses into this state where everything becomes an advertisement for itself, and everything you buy subtly encourages you to buy more, or maybe just put all your cash in a paper envelope and deposit it into a slot under the Walt and Mickey statue. That's how you ruin an attraction. You don't just make it secret and exclusive; that only makes people want it more. Instead, you relentlessly try to squeeze every last drop of money out of it. If you really want the people to stop coming, your Holy Grail is the online review that says, "Not worth the $10 parking space in some guy's front yard. Locals aggressively sell touristy crap, and the sign itself seems kind of cheap and pathetic from up close." Of course, the downside is that unless you have some sort of "identify friend or foe" system in place, you get a dozen sales pitches every time you walk from your own driveway to your own house.

lordnacho 11y ago
This is a brilliant post! I love the idea of scaring away tourists by making it more touristy.
HelloMcFly 11y ago
The people that own those houses have enough money that it isn't worth the time investment to make a little extra cash, even if the side benefit it ruining the experience. That's a hell of a time commitment.

scelerat 11y ago

The recommendation to go to Lake Hollywood for a view of the sign instead is an odd one. The access road to the reservoir is even more twisty and narrow than Beachwood Canyon.

lips 11y ago

And they can't rent bikes, create a locally-staffed concession area, sell tchotkes, and pull some $$$ out of the tourists? Tourists gonna tourist, and might as well beat them at their own game, and put the money back into trail infrastructure, and then take the cream off the top for local services.

jarsin 11y ago

Why is it in our society threatening to sue someone doing nothing wrong is not considered the same as a violent threat? Whats the difference between that homeowner saying "hey i am going to break your kneecaps" vs "hey I have more money than you and am going to destroy your life with legal action." - which is what he was implying in his email

skj 11y ago
Threatening to sue (or actually suing) is by definition never something that has legal consequences in this country. Law suits are the way of saying "We cannot agree, the state shall decide". It so happens that money can unfairly influence the state, but that is the problem, not people threatening to sue.
DanBC 11y ago
It depends who's doing the threatening and why. http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/barrister-loses-misconduct-appeal-after-threatening-to-sue-dentist/5051670.article http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/barrister-loses-misconduct-...
dragonwriter 11y ago
> Why is it in our society threatening to sue someone doing nothing wrong is not considered the same as a violent threat? Because it isn't a threat of violence. OTOH, it can be an unlawful threat, as, e.g., extortion. [1] [1] http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2009/hynes101.pdf http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2009/hynes101...
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  Every law is backed by violence. A threat of legal action is a threat of violence, even if it is delayed. So instead of breaking knee caps, it is more like threatening to get a person who may charge them $500 and if they don't pay, then break their knee caps. There is a chance they won't do anything, but it is still a threat of violence.
  - 11y ago