Slashdot Mirror
Google Claims a TOS Violation On RouteBuilder For Using the Map API (medium.com)
New submitter acm writes: RouteBuilder has been using the Google Maps API to help people share their routes (bicycling, hiking, etc) for a decade. Last week, Google sent an email demanding Routebuilder stop using the API: "In particular,your application violates clause 10.4(c), which does not allow developers to create a wrapper — an application that re-implements or duplicates the Google Maps website or mobile app, or any of the Google Maps APIs."
Why did it take the Google Maps Team 10 years to decide they don't want pedometer-type sites to use their API?
because they're about to launch their own pedometer type site?
I don't see why that site needs Google Maps specifically. Just exchange it for other service. OpenStreetMap is free and tiles are available by a couple different providers. There are others, such as Bing Maps and HERE Maps, but I have no idea about their TOS.
Maybe, but he said he does not have the free time to re-code the site, due to family and work, thus is Google does not back down or someone offers to update the site for him, then this is the end of it.
What happened? fit.google.com.
When you build on somebody's platform, it's more or less expected that this sort of thing can happen. So long as you fill a niche that they cannot or don't wish to, you are an asset, you make their platform better vs. the competition, as long as you don't do anything blatantly abusive or system-breaking, any little TOS details clearly don't forbid whatever you are doing. You might even get called onstage during some CES demo or given favorable marketing placement.
If your thing is either deemed a threat to the platform(as with Netscape's 'reduce windows to a set of poorly debugged device drivers' trash talking) or now overlaps with a feature that the platform owner wishes to add to their offerings; well, maybe you get acquired(as SoundJam MP became iTunes), maybe you'll just get squished. Happens every time.
Governments should provide these in a open standard format, to the public for free. (they must or should have this information already) This should include speed limits, (permanent and temporary) they should have this information, taxes where used to make these roads, knowing how to use these roads to get from one place to another legally should be a public right.
If they are selling this information to companies, in order that they can sell it back to us, is just wrong.
That's a nice sounding ideology but the reality is that even if you start with a good 100% accurate street map, chances are you'll never be able to keep up with the updates on your own as governments build and change roads. That's of course, assuming you even have the resources to create one to begin with.
Since this is a one man operation, I really doubt your suggestion is at all practical.
"Always have a backup plan" is not the same as "don't use third party software". I work for a company that uses google for our maps. We can also switch over to an alternative api with a click of a button. We do it occasionally for testing and I believe there might have been a problem 4-5 years ago where we ran the alternate for certain failover conditions but for the most part it has never been activated on our live servers but it's there just in case. We also use several commercial apis and on several occasions have switched vendors and then switched back for pricing reasons. Not only does this protect us from cases where the third party is no longer available but it also helps with pricing negotiations as even if we prefer one vendor over another they know that if they try to raise our rates that we are not locked into their platform.
The US Census used to run the "Tiger Map Server", they retired that and now there is TIGERweb http://tigerweb.geo.census.gov/tigerwebmain/TIGERweb_main.html.
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
RouteBuilder is not Open Source, the site says:
Q: I'm building a website that would benefit from some of the features of RouteBuilder. Will you give me the source code for free?
A: I'm sorry, I'm not interested in giving away the source code behind this website for free. However, I am open to selling a license to use it.
Free use of Google Maps in applications comes with limits on how you can use it, and how many times you can hit the Google server for free. More than likely RouteBuilder exceeded these limits and Google asked RouteBuilder to purchase a licence, which they declined to do.
This is not news.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Google has been tilting toward evil ever since Facebook passed it in views back in 2010 and at that moment everything we had done before became no good.
"You couldn't even beat Facebook"
It was great a place to work up until that day.
Laches (equity) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Laches refers to a lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim...
But the bonus is a good lesson: Don't use Google stuff. At all.
Why did it take the Google Maps Team 10 years to decide
Google didn't take 10yrs to decide they don't want wrappers, they "decided" that when they wrote the terms of service.
Some pertinent questions.
When did routebuilder "decide" to ignore the TOS?
When did google "decide" to do something about it?
How does anyone know for certain what's in a TOS agreement if nobody ever reads it?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or energy.
I don't see why that site needs Google Maps specifically. Just exchange it for other service.
Because you, Anonymous Coward, haven't offered your services to port it within 14 days. Also because I'm the wrong person for the job at the moment, having never written a line of OSM code.
I was doing a project that used their geocoding API at one point. Essentially you're only allowed to use it if you're planning on making a Google Map. You can't use it for any other purpose. You can't cache the results to save on redundant API calls. Luckily, I found an awesome alternative in OpenCage, which is backed by OpenStreetMap data and whose TOS couldn't be less restrictive.
When you don't understand the reason look to the money.
They did create most of the maps that Google is using. They should have been creative commons licenced so Google would be forced to provide their changes back to the public at least.
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
It sounds like Google's not suing them, however, so Laches would be a defense in court, but it won't help them.
Google can still cite the ToS and shut off their access to the API.
Then it would be up to RouteBuilder to file the lawsuit, if they think there is a legal reason Google cannot block their usage.
Or (more productively), they'll find another source for the data that the Google Maps API exposes.
Governments should provide these in a open standard format, to the public for free.
They provide information; it's not all in a standard format and freely available in convenient form.
If they are selling this information to companies, in order that they can sell it back to us, is just wrong.
I suspect companies are able to arrange for copies of data through records requests, involving the company paying, and they do the work of disseminating, aggregating, and translating the information to standardize and clean data for their systems.
RouteBuilder gives access to old-style Google Maps, which everybody loved, and impedes Google's forced migration to new-style Google Maps, which everybody hates.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
For a start the government doesn't actually have the data that you are talking about. They have a lot of data, but a lot of it is out of date or inaccurate for a huge number of reasons. Also roads are quite often not built by government or funded by tax payers. Any large scale land development will include myriad roads and other services that are built by the developer. The developer submits the plans of those roads to local government but those plans often don't match what is on the ground.
Google has cars that drive around mapping roads. They do this because the data is worth something. They don't just get it from the government.
And why would this be an issue? Google gives away free use of the Maps API under certain restrictions. Why, being the developer, owner, and indeed the host of all the Google Maps infrastructure, shouldn't they be able to restrict people without commercial licenses from competing with their products? Google is not a commune, it's a company.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Don't build any software on top of a 3rd party library unless it's open source or you have a permanent, non revocable license. Failing that, have a contingency plan for when they shut you off. This advice goes quadruple if planning top build a business off said software
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
But it's unfair that Google gets to take advantage of all the investments they make. Unfair, unfair, unfair.
No, it's unfair that they "bait and switch" this way. They produced an open API. An entire app ecosystem evolved around the Google free APIs, and Google's commercial rivals were forced out of business. Now there's no-one else for these sites to get their mapping from, and Google's squashing them.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Well, there's OpenStreetMap, which all third-parties should be using since, as TFA proves, using the Google Maps API is not safe.
Indeed, and it's nice of the /. editors to send us all this reminder of the fact that you shouldn't ever build anything that depends on a "service" provided by just one company. They can and sometimes do terminate such services, often without notice, or modify them so what you're using them for no longer works. And they tend to get access to all the info about your stuff, to use as they like.
In particular, any organization that depends on a company's service is run by fools. You might be able to use services like "the Cloud" as a sort of backup, if you don't mind the company seeing the contents of all your files. But you must plan for the day when the company you're using cuts you off. The only real way to do this is to make sure that you have (and control your copies of) all the hardware and software needed to keep it running. If you don't, you can be put out of business at any time, with little or no warning.
Personally, I hope that /. keeps posting the occasional stories along this line. It's clear that a lot of people don't understand it. Reminding people of such pitfalls is a public service, and it's useful to have such stories publicised when they happen. (And maybe this will get a few more people involved with openstreetmap. They could use a few more features. ;-)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.