Jump to content

Sharing PQs or BMs


BigCarbonFootprint
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

As Dan pointed, out, sharing the PQ data would be a violation and I'm not sure what good sharing a bookmark would do since you'd need to download the data in a PQ to get more than you could in individual LOC or GPX downloads.

 

Unfortunately, we're stuck with the risk that sometimes our PQs may not run immediately. I pulled down 6 on Thursday/Friday, so I didn't notice the email problems this week.

Link to comment

Is anyone aware of a method to share or post PQs and BMs for other users? A mass listing by regions would be nice and would be helpful in event like PQ server crash like last few days.

What PQ server crash??? It was the email server a bit clogged up.

 

And it was still easy enough to grab cache data and head out. Via .loc downloads from the search pages and the send to GPS if you have a Garmin. Or just print out a few cache pages and hit the trail. Not like caching came to a complete stop.

Link to comment

As Dan pointed, out, sharing the PQ data would be a violation and I'm not sure what good sharing a bookmark would do since you'd need to download the data in a PQ to get more than you could in individual LOC or GPX downloads.

 

Unfortunately, we're stuck with the risk that sometimes our PQs may not run immediately. I pulled down 6 on Thursday/Friday, so I didn't notice the email problems this week.

 

I would not intend to violate TOU, however if a user is already able to view another users Bookmarks and create a PQ of them, then why not allow paying PMs to post or exchange PQs by region, category, or other criteria. Seems it would make for less processing strain on the system.

 

I could completely ignorant of some other issues here, just thinking allowed and "what if'ing".

Link to comment

That's a big no-no. :) The only time you can share a gpx file without violating the TOU is if you have a Colorado or an oregon and share them wireless between the two GPSr's. :)

 

Did I miss section of TOU where it allows for sharing PQ data between Colorados or Oregon. I saw where is specifically prohibits electronic reproduction.

When the Colorado was released this came up and how it violated the TOU and TPTB are allowing the data exchange between the GPSr unit's.

Link to comment

That's a big no-no. :) The only time you can share a gpx file without violating the TOU is if you have a Colorado or an oregon and share them wireless between the two GPSr's. :)

 

Did I miss section of TOU where it allows for sharing PQ data between Colorados or Oregon. I saw where is specifically prohibits electronic reproduction.

When the Colorado was released this came up and how it violated the TOU and TPTB are allowing the data exchange between the GPSr unit's.

 

Interesting, would you know where this permission is documented?

Link to comment

Is anyone aware of a method to share or post PQs and BMs for other users? A mass listing by regions would be nice and would be helpful in event like PQ server crash like last few days.

Bookmarks can be shared easily, Edit the book mark and check the box that says I want to share. After that, anyone can click on the bookmark tab on your profile and there is an option for that person to build a PQ off of your BM or they can just look at the list directly. So once you put together the BM, anyone can download it. If you also click the make public check box then a link to the BM will show up on every cache page thats listed in the BM.

 

I won't touch the issue of sharing or posting PQ's and addressing that the data really belongs to the cache owner and gc is just a listing service.

Link to comment

Is anyone aware of a method to share or post PQs and BMs for other users? A mass listing by regions would be nice and would be helpful in event like PQ server crash like last few days.

Bookmarks can be shared easily, Edit the book mark and check the box that says I want to share. After that, anyone can click on the bookmark tab on your profile and there is an option for that person to build a PQ off of your BM or they can just look at the list directly. So once you put together the BM, anyone can download it. If you also click the make public check box then a link to the BM will show up on every cache page thats listed in the BM.

 

I won't touch the issue of sharing or posting PQ's and addressing that the data really belongs to the cache owner and gc is just a listing service.

 

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

Cache data does belong to the cache owner, period, at one time GS did acknowledge this in the TOU and I believe they still do. The cache owner "grants GS a license to list/distribute the info" (I'm not looking right now so may not be exact wording of the TOU, but you get the gist).

 

A BM is simply a list of caches, nothing more, really nothing to copyright or control.

 

A PQ is actual cache info (not just a list of caches, but also their description, coords, etc). This is an original work of the cache owner (and by copyright law, their info to control as they see fit). When you submit a cache, you "grant GS a license to list/distribute", your not giving up your ownership rights.

 

As a side note, GS would have serious liability issues if they claimed copyright to the cache info, after all, if its theirs, any problems related to it (think bomb squad, and the fact that most are now charging for false calls) is also their problem, as a "listing service", its not their problem (think google, just because it lists bomb creation instructions doesn't make google liable if someone uses those instructions).

 

GS never claims copyright, they just claim control over distribution of the data, as granted by the original cache owner in exchange for accepting the listing.

 

GS is strictly a listing service, beyond the layout of their pages and original software they have written to support the site, there is nothing for GS to copyright. They can't claim copyright on something they didn't originally produce or where copyright wasn't specifically assigned to them.

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

Cache data does belong to the cache owner, period, at one time GS did acknowledge this in the TOU and I believe they still do. The cache owner "grants GS a license to list/distribute the info" (I'm not looking right now so may not be exact wording of the TOU, but you get the gist).

 

A BM is simply a list of caches, nothing more, really nothing to copyright or control.

 

A PQ is actual cache info (not just a list of caches, but also their description, coords, etc). This is an original work of the cache owner (and by copyright law, their info to control as they see fit). When you submit a cache, you "grant GS a license to list/distribute", your not giving up your ownership rights.

 

As a side note, GS would have serious liability issues if they claimed copyright to the cache info, after all, if its theirs, any problems related to it (think bomb squad, and the fact that most are now charging for false calls) is also their problem, as a "listing service", its not their problem (think google, just because it lists bomb creation instructions doesn't make google liable if someone uses those instructions).

 

GS never claims copyright, they just claim control over distribution of the data, as granted by the original cache owner in exchange for accepting the listing.

 

GS is strictly a listing service, beyond the layout of their pages and original software they have written to support the site, there is nothing for GS to copyright. They can't claim copyright on something they didn't originally produce or where copyright wasn't specifically assigned to them.

 

Well, that was quit a mouthful PF. Thanks, that answered a lot of my questions. I really appreciate your taking time to fill me in. I have more questions but perhaps I have run this topic into the ground.

Link to comment

Is anyone aware of a method to share or post PQs and BMs for other users? A mass listing by regions would be nice and would be helpful in event like PQ server crash like last few days.

Bookmarks can be shared easily, Edit the book mark and check the box that says I want to share. After that, anyone can click on the bookmark tab on your profile and there is an option for that person to build a PQ off of your BM or they can just look at the list directly. So once you put together the BM, anyone can download it. If you also click the make public check box then a link to the BM will show up on every cache page thats listed in the BM.

 

I won't touch the issue of sharing or posting PQ's and addressing that the data really belongs to the cache owner and gc is just a listing service.

 

This BM option is a nice solution with the exception of public use BMs are not consolidated and listed in one place. Would it not be convenient to be able to query BMs in a region or theme or other criteria, similar to the way routes are listed and open to user perusal. Naturally a user/owner would have to give permission to view and dl their BM listing by posting.

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

 

So you are saying that I can own an Apple but not and Orange. The end result of Apples and Oranges are the same, to end up with a list of geocaches. Does it matter whether they are carmel on a stick, sliced and baked in a pie, dipped in chocolate, or mixed with vodka. They both will be consumed if allowed by the owner of the tree. Huh, what was that all about.

 

Anyway, do you get my confusion. I'm just saying if someone wants to share their favorite PQ with me, what is the problem?

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

 

So you are saying that I can own an Apple but not and Orange. The end result of Apples and Oranges are the same, to end up with a list of geocaches. Does it matter whether they are carmel on a stick, sliced and baked in a pie, dipped in chocolate, or mixed with vodka. They both will be consumed if allowed by the owner of the tree. Huh, what was that all about.

 

Anyway, do you get my confusion. I'm just saying if someone wants to share their favorite PQ with me, what is the problem?

 

Actually, it's more that you can own your apples (PQs), but not share them with others. And you can show people pictures of your apples (bookmarks) which they can use to order their own apples. Groundspeak is the owner of the PQs and licenses the access to you for your personal use. You just can't get your PQs, slap some caramel on them and pass them out to the kids down the street.

Link to comment

I wish someone from Groundspeak would answer these questions as the information that has been given in some of the answers seems a little different than my understanding. I will present my understand here but it is by no means the official answer.

 

Groundspeak provides PQs as a benefit to premium members. PQs are meant to allow users to download a reasonable number of caches for personal use such as planning a day's geocaching activities or tracking personal statistics (using my finds or a PQ of caches you own). What Groundspeak does want is for users to get together to share PQs and thus replicate a substantial part of the database (such as a mass listing of the caches in a region). Even it this were done by a group where everyone was a premium member and only used by the group for personal reasons, Groundspeak may feel that they need to prohibit even this kind of sharing in order to be able to stop groups that might use the PQs for commercial use. Certainly, from time to time Groundspeak servers may not be able to deliver PQ results in as timely a fashion as we are used to. People often look to a suggestion of having some canned queries that could be downloaded for this instance. Again, Groundspeak may feel that a large regional query could be abused and prefer not to have one. They have said in the past that they are looking for alternate ways to deliver PQ results as apparently there have been issues before with using email.

 

The Garmin Oregon and Coloarado have an ability to beam cache information from one unit to another. They also have the ability to load the PQ results directly into the unit and the units can display the cache descriptions and logs. When asked, Groundspeak simply said that using the beaming capability of the Garmin units would not be considered a violation of the Waypoint license agreement. They also were silent (as far as I recall) on other devices that had the capability to share. The Oregon and Colorado share individual waypoints not GPX files, and my understanding is that not all of the information from the GPX is transferred even for a single waypoint.

 

Bookmarks are another feature that premium members get. Each premium member can set up 20 bookmark lists. Lists can be designated as shared or public. What this means is that other users can see the caches in the bookmark list. Premium users can also create a PQ to get the information about the caches listed on their own or on any shared or public bookmark list. Now I suppose a premium member could take one of their 20 bookmark list and offer to make a bookmark list for another user (maybe a basic user or a premium user who has used all 20 of his bookmark lists). This list however would still be identified as belonging to the account where it is created and only that account could maintain the list. I'm not really seeing what advantage you see in sharing bookmark lists and how this would help if the PQ server or mail server is not functioning.

Link to comment

This BM option is a nice solution with the exception of public use BMs are not consolidated and listed in one place. Would it not be convenient to be able to query BMs in a region or theme or other criteria, similar to the way routes are listed and open to user perusal. Naturally a user/owner would have to give permission to view and dl their BM listing by posting.

This is a suggestion I can agree with. Right now public bookmark lists appear on the caches pages of the caches on the list and on the profile page of the list owner. Shared bookmark lists don't appear any where unless the list owner post a link somewhere.

 

Someone wanting to search for - let's say night caches - might want to see if there are any night cache bookmark lists in their area. Assuming that these list are public, one could just find one night cache and hope it is on a list with many other caches. But wouldn't it be easier to be able to search for night cache bookmark list with one or more caches that are within some distance of my home coordinates? Or how about just a list of bookmark lists in my are where more the 70% found this list useful? I believe if bookmark lists were searchable this way they would be a lot more useful.

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

 

So you are saying that I can own an Apple but not and Orange. The end result of Apples and Oranges are the same, to end up with a list of geocaches. Does it matter whether they are carmel on a stick, sliced and baked in a pie, dipped in chocolate, or mixed with vodka. They both will be consumed if allowed by the owner of the tree. Huh, what was that all about.

 

Anyway, do you get my confusion. I'm just saying if someone wants to share their favorite PQ with me, what is the problem?

 

The problem is that it is a violation of the agreement you made when you became a premium member. The agreement states that you will not share the PQ data with a 3rd party. You can share a BookMark. The someone, if they are a premium member can generate their own PQ from that bookmark. You have not shared the copyrighted information in the PQ. You see if one of the caches in in the PQ is one of my caches, I own the copyright on that information. I have agreed with GS to share the information with you. I have not agreed to allow you to share the information with who ever you choose. That is the problem, you don't own the copyright on the data in the PQ, and neither does GS.

 

As Prime Suspect pointed out, BookMarks are nothing more than a list of caches, there is no copyrighted information in this list because there is no short description, long description, hints, logs and other items.

 

Jim

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

 

So you are saying that I can own an Apple but not and Orange. The end result of Apples and Oranges are the same, to end up with a list of geocaches. Does it matter whether they are carmel on a stick, sliced and baked in a pie, dipped in chocolate, or mixed with vodka. They both will be consumed if allowed by the owner of the tree. Huh, what was that all about.

 

Anyway, do you get my confusion. I'm just saying if someone wants to share their favorite PQ with me, what is the problem?

 

Actually, it's more that you can own your apples (PQs), but not share them with others. And you can show people pictures of your apples (bookmarks) which they can use to order their own apples. Groundspeak is the owner of the PQs and licenses the access to you for your personal use. You just can't get your PQs, slap some caramel on them and pass them out to the kids down the street.

 

KK, that is the best yet. I am just about in tears here LMFAO!!! :):laughing::):laughing::laughing::D:laughing:

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

 

So you are saying that I can own an Apple but not and Orange. The end result of Apples and Oranges are the same, to end up with a list of geocaches. Does it matter whether they are carmel on a stick, sliced and baked in a pie, dipped in chocolate, or mixed with vodka. They both will be consumed if allowed by the owner of the tree. Huh, what was that all about.

 

Anyway, do you get my confusion. I'm just saying if someone wants to share their favorite PQ with me, what is the problem?

 

The problem is that it is a violation of the agreement you made when you became a premium member. The agreement states that you will not share the PQ data with a 3rd party. You can share a BookMark. The someone, if they are a premium member can generate their own PQ from that bookmark. You have not shared the copyrighted information in the PQ. You see if one of the caches in in the PQ is one of my caches, I own the copyright on that information. I have agreed with GS to share the information with you. I have not agreed to allow you to share the information with who ever you choose. That is the problem, you don't own the copyright on the data in the PQ, and neither does GS.

 

As Prime Suspect pointed out, BookMarks are nothing more than a list of caches, there is no copyrighted information in this list because there is no short description, long description, hints, logs and other items.

 

Jim

 

Thanks Jim, I think I understand now. It is OK to identify an bank via a BM and tell a user how to get there via a public route, but just do not go inside with a PQ and rob the place.

Link to comment

Mmmm, how does a PQ belong to an owner and a Bookmark does not. It seems to me that both are owned by GS and would be restricted to their TOU. Both are created and used by an end user, just Bookmarks can be shared and PQs can not. Just looking for the logic in that design.

PQs are data. Bookmarks are just pointers to cache pages. Apples and Oranges.

 

So you are saying that I can own an Apple but not and Orange. The end result of Apples and Oranges are the same, to end up with a list of geocaches. Does it matter whether they are carmel on a stick, sliced and baked in a pie, dipped in chocolate, or mixed with vodka. They both will be consumed if allowed by the owner of the tree. Huh, what was that all about.

 

Anyway, do you get my confusion. I'm just saying if someone wants to share their favorite PQ with me, what is the problem?

 

Actually, it's more that you can own your apples (PQs), but not share them with others. And you can show people pictures of your apples (bookmarks) which they can use to order their own apples. Groundspeak is the owner of the PQs and licenses the access to you for your personal use. You just can't get your PQs, slap some caramel on them and pass them out to the kids down the street.

 

I feel so dirty showing others pictures of my apples.

Link to comment
Thanks Jim, I think I understand now. It is OK to identify an bank via a BM and tell a user how to get there via a public route, but just do not go inside with a PQ and rob the place.

Even this isn't quite accurate because a Bookmark only tells them the name of the bank and a link to their website. How to get there, or even whether to look at the website or not, is up to the recipient.

Link to comment

My neighbor across the street Caches with me.

 

So if I foward a PQ to him of where we are going this weekend that is a no no.

 

If I download the PQ to GSAK and then he comes over and I download it to his GPSr from GSAK, Is that ok. 000201DD.gif

 

We are both PM's. Sure can be confusing.

 

How does GS know if I forward a PQ to some one????

Link to comment

My neighbor across the street Caches with me.

 

So if I foward a PQ to him of where we are going this weekend that is a no no.

 

If I download the PQ to GSAK and then he comes over and I download it to his GPSr from GSAK, Is that ok. 000201DD.gif

 

Both are violations of the ToU.

 

We are both PM's. Sure can be confusing.

 

How does GS know if I forward a PQ to some one????

 

Not really confusing. You are simply not allowed to share PQs.

 

They don't, same as Microsoft does not know if you share a copy of Windows 2000. There is an assumption however that you will honor what you agreed to when you signed up.

Edited by baloo&bd
Link to comment

On a completely unrelated note...

 

Record companies impose strict limits on the use of their music, because to do otherwise would weaken their ability to control it. I'm certain that, privately, they don't care if you make a copy for your brother so the two of you can listen to it in his car, but you'd be hard pressed to get them to admit it.

 

Sorry for the thread derail...

Link to comment

On a completely unrelated note...

 

Record companies impose strict limits on the use of their music, because to do otherwise would weaken their ability to control it. I'm certain that, privately, they don't care if you make a copy for your brother so the two of you can listen to it in his car, but you'd be hard pressed to get them to admit it.

 

Sorry for the thread derail...

:bad:

Link to comment

On a completely unrelated note...

 

Record companies impose strict limits on the use of their music, because to do otherwise would weaken their ability to control it. I'm certain that, privately, they don't care if you make a copy for your brother so the two of you can listen to it in his car, but you'd be hard pressed to get them to admit it.

Sorry for the thread derail...

:D

 

00020263.gif 000202C7.gif

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...