[pmwiki-users] GoogleMap question

[Chris Cox]

Ben Wilson wrote:
...
> "For individual users, Google Maps, including local search results,
> maps, and photographic imagery, is made available for your personal,
> non-commercial use only. For business users, Google Maps is made
> available for your internal use only and may not be commercially
> redistributed, except that map data may be accessed and displayed by
> using the Google Maps API pursuant to the API terms and conditions."
> [1]
> 
> Translation: business sites must use the API. Therefore, the
> IncludeSite recipe and PmWiki's Intermap capability are both a
> violation of Google's terms of service when used by a business.
> 
> "By using Google Maps and any data or information accessed from Google
> Maps, you agree to be bound by our Google Terms of Service as well as
> these additional terms and conditions." [1] The Google Terms of
> Service state: "You may not take the results from a Google search and
> reformat and display them, or mirror the Google home page or results
> pages on your Web site."[2]
> 
> Accessing the Google map via GET and redisplaying on your web site is
> the same as mirroring search content, as you are using the address as
> a query string to search Google's database for satellite imagery.
> Therefore, by using the Intermap attribute or IncludeSite recipe is a
> violation of Google's TOS, even when doing so as a personal user. As a
> consequence, the only way to legally display Google map content on a
> web site is to use the Google Map API.

Does Google own the right to your internet content?  Do they own
the right to photograph your house at will?  Do they own the right
to cache everything on the internet?  If you agree that they OWN
all of these things.. then you may have a very valid point.

> 
>> Actually, they can't prevent it... in fact, it's less intrusive
>> than their API google-wise.
> 
> Based on my argument above, Google can enforce its rights via
> injunction under the Terms of Service and the Map Terms of Service.
> While it may be less intrusive, to interface Google's map service in
> contravention of its Terms is a violation of its rights and it may
> enforce.

Google does not prevent you from viewing a map on their web site.
That's all that includeSite and InterMap links will allow you do
do.

> 
>> The disadvantage is you have to register (by Google policy) and
>> it's not nearly as simple an interface.
> 
> Google owns the database, it owns the images, and it owns the
> interface. Therefore, it is entitled to name its terms for access. "He
> who pays the piper names the tune." The registration process is
> simple: give them the URL to your site, and agree to comply with its
> terms.[3] Google does not even require a site POC. Therefore, the
> disadvantage you offer is a trivial consideration for what Google
> provides in return--which is a legal right to display its content on a
> web site.
> 
> [1]: http://maps.google.com/help/terms_maps.html
> [2]: http://www.google.com/terms_of_service.html
> [3]: http://www.google.com/apis/maps/signup.html
> 

Photography is certainly an interesting thing.  I can't make
a "copy" of your copyrighted work.. but under most laws I can
make as many high resolution photographs of it that I want.
Ridiculous.  Not saying Google doesn't have a leg to stand
on.. but sort of funny that the cacher/copier of the
Internet could sue someone for capturing content
from them (ironic even).  AFAIK, Google has not secured
the necessary permission from all copyright holders
of web content.  AND.. realize that Google is using
YOUR content (without permission) as an integral part
of their revenue/business model.

Anwyay, if it bothers you.. by all means do not live in fear...
do what your conscience tells you is safe with regards
to Google.

IANAL.  But I do stand behind my belief of what can
be allowed.  If Google wants to sue me... they have
my permission to do so... in fact, I'd love to see
it!!