Josh,

Here's an older thread regarding this that may help --
http://markmail.org/message/z2psjknkxv3s6ogn

I'm kind in the same boat attempting to decipher the ToS.  In your
case, I would say that you're covered (IANAL, either).

-Tony


On Feb 25, 10:35 am, Josh Rosenthal <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> Very interesting.  Reading your response, it sounds as though, in your
> opinion (recognizing that YANAL, and thus I will need to persuade
> myself/consult a lawyer myself), the idea that certain overlays are not
> accessible to the guest account does not change the fact that the 'Maps API
> Implementation' is generally accessible as required by the ToS.
>
> ie: The 'Maps API Implementation' must be generally accessible, while a
> specific overlay or control need not be.
>
> While this could circumvent the spirit of the law (contentless guest map), I
> don't think my implementation is in danger of that, as the overwhelming bulk
> of data is available to the guest map.
>
> Any other thoughts?  (or anyone else... kinda curious to know if theres a
> consensus on this out there, or a variety of interpretations).
>
> Josh
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Andrew Leach (Maps API Guru) <
>
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 25, 12:31 pm, Josh Rosenthal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Thoughts?  Am I missing something?
>
> > My thoughts are...
>
> > "Generally accessible" doesn't mean "on the whole", or "most of it".
> > It has a specific legal meaning of "accessible to the general public"
>
> > 9.1 says "Your Maps API Implementation must be generally accessible to
> > users without charge," and you have said that anyone can get to your
> > map. That satisfies that condition.
>
> > 9.1 says "You may require users to log in to your Maps API
> > Implementation if you do not require users to pay a fee," and you have
> > stated that your logins would be free. That satisfies that condition.
>
> > 9.1 says "Your Maps API Implementation must not require a fee-based
> > subscription or other fee-based restricted access," and you have
> > stated that it won't: access is free. That satisfies that condition.
>
> > Where there is any conflict or ambiguity, the TOS override the FAQ,
> > which are there to provide a gloss, with specific examples. I think
> > that restricting data with a free password is acceptable. In the end,
> > the decision is yours and you may need your own lawyer to convince you
> > one way or the other.
>
> > Andrew
> > not a lawyer
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to