Jump to content

route planner site


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Not all gpx files come from Geocaching.com. not all gpx tiles contain full geocache descriptions. For that mater, not all Geocaches come from Geocaching.com

 

I'd Like to try out the site for non-geocaching purposes, but I don't have a link

Edited by madman1892
Link to comment

In fact, using an unprocessed PQ with that site would be very difficult. It'd just be way too much data work work through.

 

Keystone's admonition of "you may not share GPX files without our permission" is misleading at best. Groundspeak does not hold any kind of exclusivity on the file format, only the data contained within, and only if that data originated from geocaching.com. I can create my own GPX file with anything I want inside it without asking Groundspeak's permission.

Edited by dakboy
Link to comment

In fact, using an unprocessed PQ with that site would be very difficult. It'd just be way too much data work work through.

 

Keystone's admonition of "you may not share GPX files without our permission" is misleading at best. Groundspeak does not hold any kind of exclusivity on the file format, only the data contained within, and only if that data originated from geocaching.com. I can create my own GPX file with anything I want inside it without asking Groundspeak's permission.

This sounds good, but the route planner site was obviously designed with the Groundspeak GPX files in mind. There was no mention of anything other than Groundspeak GPX files in the description or on the Web page.

 

I'm not crazy about Groundspeak's restriction in this case, since there didn't seem to be any intent to share the GPX file among multiple users and no intent (that I could see) to even store the information on the Web site as INATN does, but technically it does seem to violate the data license.

 

--Larry

Link to comment
I'm not crazy about Groundspeak's restriction in this case, since there didn't seem to be any intent to share the GPX file among multiple users and no intent (that I could see) to even store the information on the Web site as INATN does, but technically it does seem to violate the data license.

Theoretically, all the site needs to do is contact Groundspeak and obtain permission, right?

 

Of course, in an imperfect world, we have ego, personality conflicts, misunderstandings, and/or lawyers.

Link to comment

 

I'm not crazy about Groundspeak's restriction in this case, since there didn't seem to be any intent to share the GPX file among multiple users and no intent (that I could see) to even store the information on the Web site as INATN does, but technically it does seem to violate the data license.

 

 

I've spoken with the developer, and looked at the code, and all the site does is parse the GPX file, then throw it away. It does not store the file, and it definitely does not share the file, as Keystone seems to think it does. (EDIT: For those that are able, the code is freely available to check this claim).

 

If uploading a GPX file for code to parse and spew back some information to the owner of the GPX file is against the TOS, then so be it. But the code is not saving, nor sharing.

 

To be honest, when I saw the original thread go up I thought "Oooh, this looks cool. Wait, GS are gonna hit this soon..." Oh well...

Edited by tiiiim
Link to comment

Just uploading the file to a 3rd party, regardless how it is used, is a violation of the TOU. Keystone pointed that out. Now if the site owner would compose an email explaining what the site does and how it uses the gpx files and sends it to contact@geocaching.com they might possibly agree that this is a legitimate use of the gpx files and grant the site owner a license to use the gpx files. INATN and mygeocachingprofile have done this and they have on their site that they received permission from GC.com. Then the site owner is happy, the community is happy and GC.com is happy and Keystone is happy. Seems simple to me.

Link to comment

Just uploading the file to a 3rd party, regardless how it is used, is a violation of the TOU. Keystone pointed that out.

No, the TOU are only violated if you upload a GPX file produced by geocaching.com containing data from geocaching.com.

 

The site in question will accept any GPX file and Groundspeak, as I noted above, has no exclusivity on the file format itself. If I have a GPX file from another geocaching listing service, there is no violation. If I create my own GPX file with my own data, there is no violation.

 

Keystone wote:

Sharing GPX files with third parties is a violation of the Groundspeak data license agreement.
As I said, this is misleading at best. I can create a GPX containing no Groundspeak data, and if what Keystone writes is Groundspeak's official position to the letter, Groundspeak believes I have somehow violated a license agreement which has no bearing on data that never touched their servers.

 

In their zeal to protect "their" data, Groundspeak is unquestionably going to drive some people away from developing useful tools. Especially when their representatives word things poorly as was done above.

Edited by dakboy
Link to comment

The site in question will accept any GPX file and Groundspeak, as I noted above, has no exclusivity on the file format itself. If I have a GPX file from another geocaching listing service, there is no violation. If I create my own GPX file with my own data, there is no violation.

Once again... You know as well as I do that 99.9% of cachers who would use this Web site either wouldn't know how to, or wouldn't bother to, create their own GPX files, and even if they did, they would base it on data downloaded from Groundspeak. I'd love to see this Web site up and running, but no matter how you cut it it's a data license violation unless it's approved by Groundspeak.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

Just uploading the file to a 3rd party, regardless how it is used, is a violation of the TOU. Keystone pointed that out.

No, the TOU are only violated if you upload a GPX file produced by geocaching.com containing data from geocaching.com.

 

The site in question will accept any GPX file and Groundspeak, as I noted above, has no exclusivity on the file format itself. If I have a GPX file from another geocaching listing service, there is no violation.

 

Give me a break. Uploading a file from GC.com is is violation. 99.999% of the files uploaded will be from GC.com. Yes GC.com does not have an exclusive right on the file format, but they have exclusive rights on the *data*. So all the site owner has to do is *ASK* GC.com for permission to allow gpx files *FROM* GC.com com to be uploaded and there will be no problems. For completeness they probably should ask other listing sites for the same permission. The whole issue is the *data*, not the *format*. Simple concept to understand.

Edited by jholly
Link to comment

Gee, I'm really sorry about all this, I honestly did not know about any restrictions; I did look at the Terms of Use page from the Geocaching website, but it talked only about the use of logos, which I didn't use, and I got the impression that if everything was on the up-and-up, kept geocaching and Groundspeak in a good light, and was not-for-profit, then there wouldn't be any issues.

 

I really didn't think it was a big deal insofar as GSAK, iCacheStats, and a bunch of other programs I've run across all parse the GPX file format and I assumed there was no problem with it, as I didn't see anywhere that "permission to use the GPX file format has been granted by..."

 

Just to let everyone know, I did send an email to Groundspeak, asking for permission. I emphasized that it was 100% not-for-profit, source code available, fun thing and I am willing to make whatever changes they want, any additional legalese, etc.. I don't want to run afoul of anybody. It is just a program I created for myself, and thought that it would be nice to share.

Edited by tachoknight
Link to comment

Thank you for asking. It sounds like a very useful site. As an aside, if I generate a PQ and load it into my GSAK program I have not violated the TOU. The information is for my use on my computer, this is a permitted use. Likewise with the other programs. You are not loading them to another site, nor are you sharing them with someone else.

Link to comment

Thank you for asking. It sounds like a very useful site. As an aside, if I generate a PQ and load it into my GSAK program I have not violated the TOU. The information is for my use on my computer, this is a permitted use. Likewise with the other programs. You are not loading them to another site, nor are you sharing them with someone else.

The irony is that the original-original version was a C++-based console-based application; I only made it a website because it was a collection of smaller pieces that were not user-friendly and was kind of a drag even for me to use. I suppose I could re-rewrite it as a GUI application. :)

Link to comment

Tachoknight, please consider doing this:

 

1) Republish the link to your site -- not only here, but on every GPS technology and related software forum you can think of. Not everyone would think of googling your screen name Tachoknight on site:code.google.com to find your project.

 

2) Remove all references to "Geocaching" and "Pocket Queries" and maybe even frogs. Instead, advertise your program purely as an exercise in the decades-old, very common Traveling Salesman Problem -- that happens to create routes between WAYPOINTS or POINTS OF INTERESTS and uses the open-sourced GPX file format.

 

Nothing to do with geocaches, it's all about GPS and trip plannig software. Perfectly legit topic for discussion. Does not dilute GC.com's tradremarks, impact their servers, or violate their terms of use.

Edited by lee_rimar
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...