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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
But it's unfair that Google gets to take advantage of all the investments they make. Unfair, unfair, unfair.