pppingme

Without a case number, this whole story is suspect at best.

Once again, I fail to follow your "logic." Anybody can be sued for anything. If an out-of court settlement is your definition of "successful," then your initial statement could be applied to anything, not just geocaching. From a legal standpoint, it is not precedent until it has gone to trial or a judge has ruled on it. Neither happened in this case, so either you don't understand or you are being deliberately misleading. This point struck me too. To put it bluntly, if someone is stupid enough to agree to a settlement without understanding the law involved or without at least getting solid legal advice, then that's not winning a case, that's taking advantage of someones stupidity.

Whats the case number?

If point #2 is correct (which in itself sounds a bit fishy), then the CO most likely would have been indemnified, assuming in fact that the public is allowed on the property. If that's the case, then not only would the CO have won the suit, he would have been able to obtain a judgment against the other party and recover any atty fees. Something here doesn't sound right. Why would the current property owner (I'm guessing some form of government?) be exempt from lawsuits?

http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2011/12/12/columbus-suspicious-package.html

From a database perspective, and postal perspective, DC is always treated as a state, and places like Guam treated as countries. If this was any different, then programming for this would start becoming very very complex, and buggy. This isn't a defense of how gc handles this, its just how its done across any industry.

Who's your ISP? I've seen some smaller ISP's block IP's in the paranoia game. Are you on a cable or dsl or something else? DSL (well more technially pppoe) is usually pretty easy to flip IP's, just drop the connection for a minute. Cable (more technically any provider using dhcp) is a little harder, most like to re-assign the same IP.

For all purposes, DC is a state, it just lacks a state government.

Then you weren't on the site.

Anything other than returning it to the owner is theft, there's nothing to debate or question. Its not yours to donate and its not yours to dispose of.

If you log a cache more than once, the cache only shows up in the PQ once, but with multiple logs. So, you're PQ has 7752 caches and 8588 logs.

Then how mad will you be when they drop the price to $12 annually (or even less)? Will you expect that to be pro-rated and a refund issued?

You mean like this: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?u=MrLifeboat&sortdir=desc&sort=fav

I've noticed some hit and miss all day. On the miss it just times out.

You could probably look at the trail that the unit keeps, usually its pretty obvious where you're looking for a cache. You could either reload the caches in the area and look at the map on the unit, or load the trail into another mapping program with the area caches and figure it out.

Just put the .gpx file directly in the /Garmin/GPX folder then reboot the Oregon.

Yeah, the fact that gs doesn't ban the word c:geo in the forums anymore, they've dropped their attitude with it, now why can't some users that are stuck in the past? Oh, and I've already stated this.

How live maps work: Look at a page such as: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?lat=34.1&lng=-99.9&f=1&dist=10 Then (if I'm remembering correctly, I should probably look at the source code again) pulls the loc for that page. {site usage ends here} Now present it graphically instead of textually (again, enhanced browser) using maps and overlaying icons that are all from NON gc/gs sources. Where's the automated part? None of this happens until the user taps the screen for the spot they want to see. Its simply presenting it differently, its not touching the gc maps at all, its simply using the same link almost every one of us uses every day, and presenting it in a graphical format. How many of us haven't grabbed an loc from a page and imported it into some mapping program? Why is this different? The only difference I see is that someone in Seattle seems to have a grudge against the original c:geo author, and somehow this makes c:geo the bad guy.

C:GEO doesn't do anything until the user clicks on it (well, more technically taps the screen), it doesn't do anything on its own, it doesn't do anything without being asked, where's the "AUTOMATED" that everyone keeps quoting? ITS NOT THERE. It doesn't go out every day or hour and fetch new pages, it can't, there's nothing in the code to do that. At no point, and there is nothing in the code, will it ever go to the gc site without the user explicitly tapping the screen. There is simply no "automated" accessing of the gc site, anywhere.

Break this down: Most people won't disagree that robots or spiders violate the TOU. When you read this, you see that the word "scraper" is followed by "or other automated". This clearly means automated scrapers, not a custom browser (as many, including me, have interpreted c:geo to be). To try to define this ANY other way would put most of the greasemonkey scripts, or for that matter, a lot of browser add-ons in the "violates TOU" group as well, those seem to be mostly accepted.

They have? When? Cite references please. When GS does something, sometimes its by lack of action. GS used to consistently lock and hide any thread that mentioned it, and for the threads they left going, the phrase "c:geo" would be edited out. Even though they haven't stated that they no longer do this, its obvious they don't. Several months ago this thread would have disappeared within 15 minutes of the OP.

I don't believe that c:geo would have ever made it off the ground if the Groundspeak app was free (which it should be). One of groundspeaks problems is that they seem to think they need to profit off ever aspect of the hobby. If they simply focused on making a quality site, and offering PM's good value, they would make more profit in the long run.

I'm pretty sure it is the most popular Droid geocaching app and probably more popular than all the others (except maybe Groundspeak's) combined. It IS more popular than groundspeaks app. The question comes up, why would anyone pay for an inferior app, when there is a superior one for free? Yeah, yeah, they claim they've fixed a lot of the problems with it, like the really bad battery drain, even after you exit the app, it not being real intuitive, it being slow and cumbersome, it crashing all the time (needing to be force closed) and many more issues, but they've already blown the reputation of the app, and even today its still not as good. When you consider Groundspeak has "40 employees" and the original c:geo was developed by one person, there's just no reason for the situation they are in, except their own actions.

This argument easily applies to every single grease monkey script out there, are they scraping? When you get right down to it, c:geo is nothing more than an activity specific browser with a built in compass.

Wow does that sound horky. Yep, that's the order that most people read (at least for english speaking countries). If there is a burden of proof, I'd say its on him, not you. I would proudly state in my log "Signed log on first page in the designated FTF spot and remainder of page was still empty". That doesn't leave much question who was FTF.