Google has rolled back its AI-powered satellite image tool from Google Earth within less than 24 hours of its launch, following comprehensive warnings from BBC Verify experts about potential misuse and misinformation risks. According to Google's statement, the company had seen "people sharing screenshots of generated imagery that appear to violate our policies" and decided to pause the feature "while we work on implementing stronger guardrails." The tool, called 'Create Image', was initially launched on Thursday but was quickly withdrawn after experts demonstrated how easily it could be misused to create convincing but false satellite imagery. As reported by Business Standard, the incident has sparked a wider debate on whether generative AI belongs in maps, legal records, medical data and other systems people rely on as evidence. Akshayy S Nanda, Partner in competition law practice at Saraf and Partners, told Business Standard that "The real concern here is about trust, not any single law. The problem starts when a platform built to show the real world starts generating realistic scenes of events that never happened."
Powered by Google's Nano Banana 2 image-generation model, the feature allowed users to select locations on Google Earth and create realistic visual overlays using text prompts. As reported by BBC Verify, experts were able to generate highly misleading images including a collapsed Eiffel Tower, a sinkhole swallowing the Great Pyramid of Giza, and Russian tanks in Ukraine's capital. AI and misinformation expert Henk van Ess demonstrated the tool's potential for creating fake images of a non-existent nuclear power plant in Iran, a refugee camp on the US-Mexico border, and a fake hospital in Gaza with a bomb crater next to it. The tool enabled users to create false scenarios on top of real satellite, aerial or 3D imagery that could then be downloaded and shared on other platforms. According to recent reports, users were able to generate images of office buildings on fire, mass destruction in San Francisco, and a smoldering crater in place of the Eiffel Tower with minimal effort.
The controversy extends far beyond satellite imagery, raising fundamental questions about AI deployment in products whose value depends on maintaining an accurate record. As Business Standard reports, Vijay Gopalakrishnan, Partner at Deloitte India, emphasized that "Organisations should evaluate AI deployments according to their business impact and implement appropriate safeguards, governance and human oversight, particularly where inaccurate outputs could affect business, compliance, privacy or public trust." The concern is not confined to satellite imagery - similar questions arise wherever AI is introduced into products including medical imaging, court documents, CCTV systems, digital archives and government databases. Akshayy S Nanda noted that "Journalists, human rights investigators and lawyers who use satellite imagery to check things like environmental damage, new construction or conflict zones now have to ask whether any given image might be fake." He added that "A generative tool built for architects or urban planners, and clearly marked as different from the real map view, is far less risky than one that adds AI-generated content straight onto imagery that millions of people treat as an accurate picture of reality."
Google stated that all generated images include an invisible SynthID digital watermark and emphasized that generated images didn't appear in the main Google Earth experience for others to see. As reported by BBC Verify, the company promised to implement stronger guardrails while working on implementing stronger safeguards. However, tests revealed that small changes to prompts could bypass Google's guidelines - for example, a request to create a "raised platform to hang traitors" next to UK parliament was rejected, but a less specific prompt was accepted. In response to concerns, Google told AFP that "We take misinformation seriously – every image created with Nano Banana in Google Earth includes the SynthID digital watermark, so if someone is unsure about an image, they can ask the Gemini app or use Lens in Search to see if the image was AI-generated." The company also noted that "In addition, we prevent image creation on harmful topics and are continually updating our protections."
The Google Earth episode highlights a regulatory challenge where the law has not caught up with embedded AI technologies. As Business Standard reports, Akshayy S Nanda noted that "The law is starting to draw a line between content that is artificially generated and content that is expected to represent reality, but regulation has not fully caught up with how these technologies are actually built into products today." He emphasized that "In these cases, the product itself lends credibility to the AI output, so users are more likely to mistake synthetic content for the real thing." The current regulatory framework provides little guidance on how provenance information should remain attached after content is exported, shared or converted into screenshots. Rather than introducing entirely new legislation, Nanda suggested that existing transparency, labelling and due-diligence requirements could be strengthened for products that function as evidence or factual records. He also noted that organisations should assess every AI deployment according to its potential impact, citing AI-generated social media content, commercial documents, systems processing personal information, and applications affecting safety as examples where stronger governance and human oversight become essential.
