I agree with August. Firstly, the "recon" provided to potential burglars would be all but useless. The vast majority of criminals don't have the luxury of internet access, nor the brains to properly utilize any data they might glean from it, or single pictures taken in the middle of the day. That's why they are criminals. They are too dumb to do anything else.
A primary rule of tactical reconnaisance is to carefully monitor the area of operations as discreetly as possible over a sustained period, in order to establish patterns. What good would a single picture do that a criminal couldn't easily accomplish by themsleves in a more effective manner?
Secondly, the Government does this crap all the time, on a much larger scale, and it generates a startling lack of concern. If these peoples' concern is privacy, they are misdirecting their attention. Have any of you ever spied on a topless lady via sattelite? Neither have I
, but I have had access to sattelite surveillance with that capability, not to mention Millimeter-wave imaging (sees through clothing and some structural materials), Infrared (sees through damn near everything), and some other interesting information-gathering systems that I will not discuss.
In any case, which is more of a threat? Which is more perturbatory? A private company using camera data to provide a helpful and accessible navigation data, or a (admittedly part-time/half-mature) government employee like myself with too much time on his hands, with access to state-of-the-art communications and monitoring equipment? And God forbid that we ever actually decide we have something to look for.....