Thanks or your answers. Pavel, you say: > 2) MY OPINION: Anybody must be able to see AT LEAST SOME data on your > map (e.g.: "Caches we found week ago")
While it makes sense, it's way too vague - much vaguer than a ToS can allow. Also, your suggestion of "caches found a week ago" is no possible and I would not know an equivalent. The game runs intensively for 30 hours (~hourly hints, constantly moving targets) and finding a target does not take it away - it only means you can't find it again for an hour; other teams can still find that target. Andrew you said: > Actually 10.4 of the Terms seems quite explicit First off, 10.4 is not relevant to this situation. I am not taking any fees from anyone: I am just giving out account to my team and not to others. The rule that is relevant is 9.1. So basically what you say is that the crux is the code that uses the API - if that is the same for every user, you can change pther factors for a select group of users. Is this a correct rewording of what you said? Jasper On 12 okt, 12:07, Andrew Leach <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 12, 8:56 am, Pavel Janíček <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > your assumption seems correct to me, but also leads to conclusion i > > think that they are against ToS > > > I will try to rephrase what i THINK "freely accessible" means to me > > Actually 10.4 of the Terms seems quite explicit: > > You must not... > 10.4 charge users or any other third party any fee for the use of the > Maps API Implementation, the Service, or the Content... > > Note: there must be no charge for the **use** of the Maps API > implementation. So it's not acceptable for anyone to have to pay a fee > to get a login to use the map. > > However, the terms do not say that access to *your* data needs to be > free (your data is not "Content", that's Google's map tiles and search > result data); nor that access to facilities like being able to save > data needs to be free. That's access to your services, not Google's, > and it costs you money to maintain a database. Consequently a "Save > this place" option in an infoWindow might return a 403 Forbidden error > to the client if an authentication cookie wasn't present in the > request. If that authentication was successful, the response could be > 200 OK because the data has been saved. The client code needs to > handle what is returned from the server, and the same client code > needs to be available to everyone. > > This post represents my opinion and nothing here should be construed > as definitive legal advice. > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
