On Nov 14, 4:21 pm, "Barry Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But there are many general points it could fall foul of (including > 10.2, 7.3(b) and can *you* enforce 3.2?)
It's not a question of enforcing it. I can say that I don't permit anyone to break the privacy policy or to make a derivative work. I don't permit it; but I can't prevent it, just as I don't can't prevent you breaking the speed limit. Actually that's quite a good analogy: the restriction on your speed is imposed by a third party, and if you borrow my car I haven't given you permission to drive too fast. You're liable for your speeding ticket, not me, even if I get the initial letter from the police. As far as an online geocoder is concerned, 7.3(b) might be a problem. Anthony's exposition on -- or exposure of -- Section 11.1 is spot-on. In fact the more I think about it the more I am inclined to pull the maps I've published. I *hope* that it's simply bad drafting and there isn't enough distinction between the Service, the Content and content supplied by third parties (i.e. me or others). If Google excluded all rights to third-party content, even Ordnance Survey might be happy. Andrew --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Maps-API?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
