You are correct that facts cannot be copyrighted. However, that does not mean you can take facts from one source and publish them elsewhere, that is exactly what copyright disallows. To publish facts you need to collect them on your own.
Your argument is one that has been attempted thousands of times within the various forums and which has always been rejected. Using someone's published work without permission is a copyright violation. Google is not willing to risk such a violation.
I'm unclear of your purpose here. Whether Google's interpretation of copyright is too strict or not does not really matter. To help you map better, you have been given Google's requirements to map. You are trying to argue that you do not have to follow them. The fact is that Google can set whatever requirements they wish, and if you do not follow them you put your account at risk. Please consider yourself informed of those requirements.
Flash - LG Connect Moderator, Maps Platinum Product Expert, Map Maker Platinum Product Expert, RER and Regional Lead
Due to the volume I receive, I do not respond to unsolicited private messages
@Flash - @OStr was kindly trying to assist me in troubleshooting a continued "not applied" on a visible business that has a presence online. I have the knowledge and photographs to add this business as I have personally visited it and pass it several times a week. Yet the fixed algorithm continues to reject my attempts to add it.
Instead of nitpicking in a really OTT way how about you address the problem @OStr was kind enough to try and help a fellow LG with?
Why does everything have to get super defensive and points scoring around here all the time? Let's just get back to doing what we do best, improving maps despite the barriers Google keep throwing our way.
* Edited as perfectly acceptable words seem to be deemed inappropriate here for some reason
I'm unclear of your purpose here. You have been given Google's requirements to map. You are trying to argue that you do not have to follow them.
Not at all. I am happy to follow Google's requirements to the letter. What I'm arguing is that your understanding or interpretation of those requirements is erroneous or incomplete, and is not applicable to the type of information verification I apply in my edits. It is in most cases, indeed, a copyright violation to publish all or part someone's work without permission. It is not automatically a copyright violation to use copyrighted work. Your statement was inaccurate as stated.
So far, none of the official Google policies you quoted or linked to mentions any ban on learning whether a business exists, or what its address and phone number is, and using that information to update GMaps. Your assertion that anything I learn by reading another website is copyrighted is factually incorrect. This topic comes up often on Wikipedia, where legal experts with far more knowledge about this than you or me have given their learned opinions.
@Flash I'll give you an example to check if I understood correctly.
I climb a mountain and i took the gps waypoint and some pics on the top. At home I try to add that mountain, not existing in GM, as a new place and GM says "not applied". That mountain exists in other maps; is this the reason for a lot of not applied? And why some mountains, existing on other maps, are accepted and some not?
You are correct that facts cannot be copyrighted. However, that does not mean you can take facts from one source and publish them elsewhere, that is exactly what copyright disallows. To publish facts you need to collect them on your own.
Your argument is one that has been attempted thousands of times within the various forums and which has always been rejected. Using someone's published work without permission is a copyright violation. Google is not willing to risk such a violation.
I'm unclear of your purpose here. Whether Google's interpretation of copyright is too strict or not does not really matter. To help you map better, you have been given Google's requirements to map. You are trying to argue that you do not have to follow them. The fact is that Google can set whatever requirements they wish, and if you do not follow them you put your account at risk. Please consider yourself informed of those requirements.
That's only partially true. You may not take the entire work and publish it. You are wrong in your generalization.
@turbotapeworm, if you have the personal knowledge then you need to make the edits, not someone else. I would agree that when Google's requirements are posted that it would be better to simply follow them than rather to try and nitpick them.
@OStr, I did provide the exact policy that disallows using other resources, please scroll up to find it. This is not my interpretation of Google's requirements, rather it something that has been confirmed over and over with Google as to be their interpretation. Remember, your protests were to @BruceDM's post telling you to only use personal knowledge. That instruction has also been posted over the years by dozens of Googler's and TCs. This will be my last post on the subject as Google's position is clear and discussion here is not going to change it.
Flash - LG Connect Moderator, Maps Platinum Product Expert, Map Maker Platinum Product Expert, RER and Regional Lead
Due to the volume I receive, I do not respond to unsolicited private messages
@turbotapeworm, if you have the personal knowledge then you need to make the edits, not someone else. I would agree that when Google's requirements are posted that it would be better to simply follow them than rather to try and nitpick them.
You're swerving the underlying message again, I can't make the edit, something isn't working despite it being proclaimed as fixed.
Another user simply used data I (a local guide in the local area to the place in question) provided to them to try and replicate my issue to aid troubleshooting.
In other words @OStr was trying to help me, other LGs experiencing the same problem, Google in troubleshooting for them and more importantly the people using Maps who might want to find out about this new place from a trusted source of information.
But not to worry, we'll all go back to editing Facebook places, at least they give you a t-shirt rather than endless grief.
2022
