19 ms·

Google is Forcing Routebuilder to Shut Down

491 points by Jerry2 11y ago

jahlove 11y ago
It took Google a decade to decide this site was violating the Terms of Service. Routebuilder does one narrow thing, it's not like they've creeped into Google's territory over the years. Something's fishy -- someone on slashdot suggested that it could be because of google's new fitness trackers (http://fit.google.com http://fit.google.com) that they're flushing out any sites at all similar. If that's the case, then sites like routebuilder should be grandfathered into the TOS.
- LoSboccacc 11y ago
  I would call that business as usual, more than fishy - those megacorp (MS, Apple, Google) have a long track of killing competitors before entering their space if at all possible, even if that means acquiring the whole business to close it down.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  A violation is a violation, period. Yeah maybe it sucks but it violates their terms, what do you expect? It's not going to be grandfathered in. No one does that because now you have exceptions to your terms of service. Likely it was a violation back in 2006 as well in which case there would obviously be no exceptions granted anyway. It's not like Google had the website sitting in a queue to be checked for violations and it took a decade to get to it. They likely hadn't looked at it at all, didn't run an audit on it etc. Google is a big company, is it really that unreasonable that it may have taken a decade before finding the violation?
kennydude 11y ago
Could it not be moved to Mapbox or OSM directly?
- virmundi 11y ago
  Or MapQuest. People forget about them but they have open maps.
  - Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
    MapQuest's open mapping initiatives are basically becoming a wrapper around Mapbox. I wouldn't build anything on MapQuest Open today, sadly.
    - sethd 11y ago
      Are you sure they are using Mapbox (the commercial service)? I thought it was all based on OpenStreetMap data.
      - Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
        Previously they ran their own stack based on OSM data, but they're now moving to use Mapbox's stack (which of course is also founded on OSM): https://www.mapbox.com/blog/mapquest/ https://www.mapbox.com/blog/mapquest/
        sethd 11y ago
        I read that link but it doesn't say anything about MapQuest Open using Mapbox and only discusses their consumer product: http://www.mapquest.com http://www.mapquest.com MapQuest Open is separate from their main product and commercial developer offerings: http://open.mapquest.com http://open.mapquest.com I don't see anything on the MapQuest Open website that indicates they use Mapbox to serve their OSM tiles.
- us0r 11y ago
  From the article: "One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or energy."
dragonsh 11y ago
Don't trust for profit organizations. Google might project itself as champion of open source but the reality is their revenue, is a result of standing on open source. Without gnu and Linux they will not even exist. When they needed google maps users they opened up. But given their profit motive they will have to shut down others which conflict with their profit. Its better to port service to something open source, like openstreetmap. Google is turning into, do every evil to generate value for shareholders. I think RMS fears of closed source js are true. It's like Windows Binary blobs.
- hawski 11y ago
  Honest question: why Google couldn't exist with FreeBSD instead of GNU and Linux? I assume that only GCC would be used in that case.
  - dragonsh 11y ago
    During time when Sergei and Larry wrote code for Google. It won't have been possible for them to survive without huge costs, if not using gnu tools and many gpl utilities, bsd code is their but not as much at that time. Moreover using bsd and then earning by making it closed source is even worse without contributing back. Indeed for that matter even today they won't survive without gpl code. The amount of gpl code used within Google compared to the code they contributed back you will still see a huge gap.
- hellbanner 11y ago
  I've tried using OpenStreetMap -- but it doesn't seem to know the names of places I go to, or sometimes even the area I'm in when I type certain city names. maps.google.com works great though. I wish I wasn't supporting Google's massive operations but it is convenient to use.
  - jcoyne 11y ago
    Have you looked at http://www.geonames.org/ http://www.geonames.org/ ?
dpcan 11y ago
What's the whole story here? Is it because he created a way for people to create routes, and is not using the official Google Maps API method for creating/showing routes? If he just altered his app to use Google's approved method, would he be fine?
- andrewguenther 11y ago
  Google Maps already provides a way for you to share routes, Routebuilder is duplicating that functionality (even if it makes it easier) which is a violation of Google Maps' ToS.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    Being better than Google is clearly a reason Google would want to shut you down.
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    > Google Maps already provides a way for you to share routes Does it? Where? Map Maker doesn't do what the article claims it does. It doesn't try to reproduce Routebuilder at all. It allows you to fix errors in Google Map's data, it isn't useful for creating new custom routes for specific purposes (e.g. races, sightseeing, etc).
    - teraflop 11y ago
      The author might have been thinking of the similarly-named "My Maps".
    - kbrosnan 11y ago
      Here is an example of a Google maps route from Providence to Boston for bicycling, https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en-US&mid=zH358fz1z920.kAlJZ89Jw4Kc https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en-US&mid=zH358fz1z920...
- pmontra 11y ago
  They are not routes. They are pins connected by straight lines. The screenshot in the post doesn't reflect the reality of the service. Try clicking on NYC, Washington DC, Detroit and Boston and see the route. Prepare to do some swimming :-) That's by design. From the FAQ: > How come if I click on two points along a curvy road, the line doesn't follow the curvature of the road? > Two reasons. First, Google doesn't provide an interface to the road data, so I have no way of knowing if you clicked on a road or not, nor do I know where the road twists and turns. > Second, many people create routes that go off-road (e.g. to plot a hiking path). These people wouldn't want RouteBuilder to follow along a road anyway. From the wording of the mail and of the ToS [1] I don't think that it would make any difference if he used the Google Directions API [2]. Actually, after reading that letter I wonder what developers can use that API for, if not for eventually getting that letter. [1] https://developers.google.com/maps/terms#section_10_4 https://developers.google.com/maps/terms#section_10_4 [2] https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/directions/intro?hl=en https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/directions/...
blindfly 11y ago
I can't tell how this Routebuilder thing is any better than just right clicking and 'distance to here'?
- maxerickson 11y ago
  There is an option in the context menu on maps.google.com "Measure distance" that it overlaps with even more. No obvious way to share the measured Google path though.
basseq 11y ago
Just because Routebuilder was never called out for violating the ToS doesn't mean it wasn't. Nor is there a "statute of limitations" for violations. What's even more insidious is that the "duplicating GM functionality" is a) vague and b) a moving target. Just because Routebuilder wasn't violating a decade ago doesn't mean it's not violating now. This is the risk you take building something on top of an API—access can be cut off at any time.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  >> This is the risk you take building something on top of an API—access can be cut off at any time. This simply cannot be stressed enough.
  - basseq 11y ago
    It's worth expanding that this is a very broad spectrum of software. No one's worried about assembly code for Intel chips, but the next generation could be locked down. No one's worried about writing C++ for Windows, but technically you're using their APIs and hooks that could be dropped in the next release. There's iOS, where you're also subject to review and approval. There's well-known web joints like Google, where this can happen. Then there's the fly-by-night shops that could just dissolve tomorrow. The safest thing is to build your own computer from silicon, write your own OS, your own compilers, your own languages, your own software, and your own APIs. Of course, by the time you do that, we'll all be dead. So it's a balancing act. But it's worth illustrating that you're taking for granted that things will remain the same forever, when in reality there's a sliding scale of risk.
    - cookiecaper 11y ago
      Free software ameliorates this problem. The code is free to live on independent of its authors or parent organization. Sun may or may not have killed its business by making all of its software open and free, but the community benefited from that immensely when Oracle took over. We don't have to start from scratch, just have to use free software. Your post also seems to assume that everyone will upgrade to the "next release". On platforms where you get to control your upgrade cycle, people won't upgrade if the upgrade breaks the programs they want to use, and this acts as a check on gratuitous API/ABI breakage. Microsoft takes this extremely seriously and has hardly any API breakage over the last 20 years because they know that there's a real threat that a competitor could emerge with WINE pre-bundled and take away some market share if they break a lot of programs.
timlyo 11y ago
I wonder how easily they could switch to open street map.
rplnt 11y ago
The most interesting part about this story for me is that Google reached out to them and didn't simply ban them without a notice or explanation.
- dclowd9901 11y ago
  But it's completely unilateral. They're ignoring him otherwise.
  - gist 11y ago
    OP said: > I have tried emailing the Google Maps team to plead my case, but my correspondence went unanswered. Where did they write? How many times did they write? How long ago did they write? Did they try any other means of contact? Did they try to go through, as only one example, linkedin and find someone that way (or any other way of researching a party that might be willing to help)? It's unclear the effort that was put in here. Maybe it was maybe it wasn't. We don't have enough detail. Simply saying "my correspondance went unanswered" as much as we may think Google doesn't care doesn't prove that point. I actually from time to time write to companies to try and sell them things. I put in effort and it appears that that greatly increases the chance that they will buy what I am trying to sell to them (meaning a decision maker not a clerk or the person who sorts thorough the spam). And email more than one time for that matter. And if it's really important try a phone call.
  - nathancahill 11y ago
    U N I L A T E R A L N I L A T E R A L
    - dang 11y ago
      Please don't do this here.
specialdragon 11y ago
"One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or energy." - Open source it (with or without the wrapper to Google Maps).
bambax 11y ago
Email from Google doesn't state what feature(s) they feel is replicated by the site, which is strange. I wonder if it has something to do with elevation? For some reason it seems GMaps is very protective about elevation data; if the site recently gained some momentum and they noticed many elevation requests, maybe it could explain this sudden (late) reaction?
- tonfa 11y ago
  I'm not even sure how the site differs from a site like http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/ http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/ (afaik it also allows the share the routes).
franze 11y ago
I wrote this 1689 days ago: "Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again?" http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for-some-of-our-apis.html?showComment=1306481143396&m=1#c3564212561169948866 http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for... Still true. HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2592399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2592399
- javajosh 11y ago
  It's all well and good to say "never use a Google API again because they might eliminate for any reason at any time" but there might not be an alternative. It's hard to get the data. Concentration of data is made concentration of wealth through APIs (or, slightly more indirectly, through the apps that use the APIs, perhaps internally). No-one concentrates data more thoroughly than Google (it's hard to appreciate how much data Google has; it started with scraping the web, but now they have real-time data on millions of sites through analytics, pictures of streets, WiFi ssid against lat/lon, and of course detailed video-viewing habits). The short-term consumer cycle is feeding a long-term data cycle that strongly favors consolidation. That's bad. Personally I think it's okay to "feed the beast" for a little while, but as soon as you get uptake and can afford the time you can and should stop feeding the beast.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again? Because you get a free high quality Maps API to use for a decade? What else would you have used in 2006?
  - Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
    Back in 2006 a bunch of us were building OSM precisely so this wouldn't be a problem in the future. But I take your point.
- adevine 11y ago
  Because your options are usually: 1. Try to do it yourself or find another service, which will usually result in much higher cost and a worse implementation, or 2. Use the Google API, with the cost of lock-in. I think the best solution is to always wrap the Google API with a generic facade, so if you do have to replace the API with something down the line it is at least possible. There are some APIs out there that already do this (e.g. http://mapstraction.com/ http://mapstraction.com/ )
Zyst 11y ago
I don't think Google is in the wrong here: If you have a route between two points 'white dots' appear in the route, then you can drag and drop those around to manually change the route, to share the URL you can either copy the url at the top bar or just click the 'share' option inside the hamburger menu, which gives you a minified link. In the end, although it's an inferior(?) implementation, Google allows you to do the exact same thing. I think the ToS call mentioned is essentially appropriate. Although it is a bit of a dick move, but in the end it is their api.
- pmontra 11y ago
  It's a vastly inferior implementation. Despite what the screenshot in the post hints to, the actual implementation only lets users connect the pins by straight lines. It doesn't follow roads and it doesn't do navigation. The reason for that is explained in the FAQ. So it's more or less what anybody would do on day 2 of learning the Google Maps API, plus the save routes (cough...) thing. With that I don't intend to show disrespect for the author, because it has been going on for 10 years with people using it. Much better than anything I built for myself. I'm surprised that Google is going after him. If that "re-implements or duplicates" anything that Google does then almost everybody should receive a letter like that. My guess is that the usage counter for this site eventually reached some limit (10 years for that), a program noticed and the legal department sent a semi automatic mail without an assessment of the service. Still it's probably in their right to do so and it's another reason to use Open Street Map to build this kind of services. Example: http://cycle.travel/ http://cycle.travel/ which does real routing. Furthermore OSM has many offroad tracks and it could make happy the kind of people using routebuilder.
theaccordance 11y ago
Pretty sure that Under Armor's MapMyFitness webapp has a route builder that uses the Google Maps API as well
RyanMcGreal 11y ago
An oldie but a goodie: Are You a Sharecropper? If you’re developing software for the Windows platform, yes. Or for the Apple platform, or the Oracle platform, or the SAP platform, or, well, any platform that is owned and operated by a company. They own the ground you’re building on, and if they decide they don’t like you, or they can do something better with the ground, you’re toast. They can ship their own product and give it away till you go bust, then start charging for it; and use secret APIs you can’t see; and they can break the published APIs you use. All of these things have historically been done by platform vendors. https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePl...
- wvenable 11y ago
  The issue that this application, for example, wouldn't exist at all if it couldn't rely on Google's services. (Unlike, say, most Facebook games). So the option is either build nothing or build something and risk it being taken away.
  - ajross 11y ago
    What specifically does the OSM platform and related projects lack that it requires? I mean, yes: Google Maps is the premier consumer mapping service out there, but it's not like the market is completely unserved by free alternatives.
    - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
      The app was written a decade ago; likely there wasn't any available APIs the OP could have used (or he may not have been aware of them if they existed). Now he doesn't have time to transition to a new set of APIs. Yeah plenty of alternatives now but does it really matter in this situation? Not really in my opinion.
      - MatthewPhillips 11y ago
        So what's the issue here? Apps do not continue to exist in perpetuity without maintenance. If he can't afford the maintenance cost (understandable) then the app is going to eventually stop working anyways.
atorralb 11y ago
this also applies for people who use their cdn for fonts or scripts. developers, please stop using google as a cdn.
kregasaurusrex 11y ago
I used to use http://runningmap.com/ http://runningmap.com/ to plan out routes for short-distance running in my neighborhood; but they stopped updating the site and my guess is their API key had gotten revoked as well.
udioron 11y ago
It should be quite easy to port your app to use leaflet.js[1] and openstreetmap/mapbox. [1] http://leafletjs.com/ http://leafletjs.com/
- vortico 11y ago
  I agree, these are fantastic projects/technologies that offer even more configurability than the Google Maps API. Porting the central part of a large company may be a challenge though, since Google Maps is so integrated into the site.
- dopamean 11y ago
  I second this as a frequent user of leaflet and openstreatmap. I started using both about 2 years ago and it's remarkable how much progress has been made in such a short amount of time.
bitL 11y ago
Anyone still finds Google relevant for anything? They are making sure nobody wants to be their friend again. Search got so bad in the past few years ("bbut our metrics show it's more relevant than evar!") that DDG doesn't even have to try. Sad. Lately if I want to watch YouTube, I have to agree to their privacy policies. If I turn off everything, I have to do the same a few days later. Antipatterns everywhere... What happened to you guys? We want the great old Google back please!
- toxik 11y ago
  Sorry, but this is absurd. DuckDuckGo is nowhere near Google in terms of revenue, brand trust, and most importantly: search result relevance.
  - bitL 11y ago
    The point is that DDG is now "good enough". I am also a bit unhappy they are embracing some approaches that made Google worse though... And Google - the only profitable part is their search + ads. If they let this slip, what would remain? A hollow shelf like when SUN imploded?
jitendrac 11y ago
Currently your site is violating the terms of google map usage. you can not ask them to allow you to keep on violating their terms. The better solution would be to write them the letter to allow you to implement the functionality of your own with in some specific time period (may be 1 month) Then, Create your own solution on some open standards or tech I recommend you to use openstreetmap mbtiles(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MBTiles http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MBTiles) I have worked with them, they are tricky but really great.
- Ensorceled 11y ago
  Why, exactly, can't he ask them if can keep on violating their terms? I don't get this attitude, Google is well within their rights to shut him down. He's well within his rights to ask for forgiveness and to complain about Google if they don't. They're a corporation, not some feudal lord that is owed fealty.
  - jitendrac 11y ago
    Google Map and its services are the intellectual property of google.They may setup any rules and terms they want for their service regulation(also to prevent any misuse of service).
    - Ensorceled 11y ago
      Yes, yes. We all agree on that. By why are you saying that " you can not ask them to allow you to keep on violating their terms". Why is asking them for an exception forbidden?
crikli 11y ago
I'm unclear as to how the Google's ToS are being violated. He's not reimplementing anything that Google has provided. If I want to create a route from my condo down to the walking path, along the path to the high school, and back to my place there is not a way to do this within Google Maps. I use this service quite frequently when traveling and my training schedule says "2.0 mile run" or whatever. I can create a circuitous route starting/ending at my hotel. Not a way to really do this in Google Maps. So, again, how is clause 10.4(c) being violated?
- soylentcola 11y ago
  Maybe I misunderstood your example but I've always found this to be pretty easy in Google Maps. I just picked a random spot on the map where there was a park (with some walking paths) and made a custom route. Took longer to pick a location for the example than it took to make the map: https://goo.gl/5TcdGz https://goo.gl/5TcdGz
  - crikli 11y ago
    I must be dense then. I'm unable to figure out how to do this.
    - soylentcola 11y ago
      Open Google Maps in a browser. Enter your starting location. Find points along your path, right click, and choose "add destination". Repeat until you have your path. Then you can click and drag the blue line of the path if you want to take a different route than the one that is auto-generated. If you choose "walking" instead of driving or transit it will include any walking paths in the database.
lifeisstillgood 11y ago
This is the very early signs of a trend that is going to grow - the conversion of private conquest of the Internet into public goods. Google has two huge advantages in search - they have scraped links off every web page, which can be replicated (see Bing, DuckDuckGo) and they have user behaviour visiting those pages (did they immediately return to results page after hitting ,#1?) There are good arguments to be made that both data sets are public goods, and indeed that it was unfair to use user generated content / data without licensing There are of course arguments to the contrary. but googles jewels are too valuable to be left alone for lomg
outside1234 11y ago
Just move on to Open Street Maps.
dawnbreez 11y ago
It used to be that Google didn't play dirty. When did that change?
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  When Larry Page became CEO, basically.
  - wangii 11y ago
    When Google was no longer growing rapidly. The gravity crushed ideology.
    - awqrre 11y ago
      Was that at the same time that they dropped their "Don't be evil" motto?
- ausjke 11y ago
  since they removed the 'do not be evil' slogan? just move to openstreetmap and ditch google map api.
burritojustice 11y ago
open > proprietary: If you want routing (and elevation and a time-distance matrix) based on open data, via an API with liberal licensing, all based on open source code that you could run yourself if you wanted, you may want to take a look at Mapzen's Turn-by-Turn routing. We built it to get away from this kind of thing. more here: https://mapzen.com/projects/valhalla https://mapzen.com/projects/valhalla docs: https://mapzen.com/documentation/turn-by-turn/ https://mapzen.com/documentation/turn-by-turn/ API: https://mapzen.com/developers/ https://mapzen.com/developers/
- fixermark 11y ago
  Mapzen seems like a good idea, but I can't help but wonder (with respect): Can a developer expect it to be here in 2026? Seems like someone integrating against an API has the choice of "Use one from a big company with a proven business model and risk their TOS changing to have it taken away" vs. "Use one from a firm with only a few years of history and risk them going dark one day (or changing their TOS)." In this specific scenario, I'm not sure that this solution would guarantee the developer could have avoided this failure mode.
  - HaloZero 11y ago
    You're right, it's a bit of Catch-22. But the benefits of using the open approach though is that it helps promote them which could help get them marketshare/mindshare and help bring attention/support to them. At least that's what i'm hoping would be the case.
  - burritojustice 11y ago
    A great question. That's why we make all the underlying source code open, including chef and docker config info for people to build it themselves if they want or need to. https://github.com/valhalla/ https://github.com/valhalla/ We at Mapzen are explicitly designing our projects to outlast us (if necessary). https://mapzen.com/blog/our-magna-carto https://mapzen.com/blog/our-magna-carto
    - mikeg8 11y ago
SFjulie1 11y ago
Nul ne peut se prévaloir de ses propres turpitudes. No one can prevail that a successful lasting violation of law worth recognition of it as an accepted legal usage. (Except if you are rich and have guns because when it comes to owning lands, occupying long enough a place is legally owning). I do agree that the ToS are shit. They were since the beginning. What new brands are doing is called : claiming rights on the second creation. They give you proprietary shovels with open API to rush for gold, and once you have taken the risks and you can make money they can decide to let you live or not. People laughed at me 10 years ago with this topic. Entrepreunariat is about being a jake of all trades. You cannot be weak neither in coding, nor economy, nor business, nor accounting, nor legal contracts. You skipped "the leg days" of business. Reading the contracts and evaluating the risks, assessing the uncertainties. And you failed. Well. Blame it on you and your blindness. Don't appeal to my pity. Vae Victis. That is the way of business, and you should take responsibility for your own bad choices and understand that with great power comes more painful arrows in the knees. All people supporting your claims should rather also think of the consequences of sustaining unsound business practices. If you would win, it would be yet another loss for all of a fair competition on the market. I actually love your idea and have a lot of respect for your realization. Building is great. Making lasting products and risk management is even more important. So, please shutdown your site and share the depressing conclusions you will come to. Learn like a true entrepreneur, and go back to work with your newly acquired knowledge, and think of whether or not you can rebuild your product on better foundations. Success is not what make business man. It is overcoming your failure. The only true capital of a business man is fortitude.
- AKifer 11y ago
  Well said, learn and look forward, that's the only way.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
espin 11y ago
How is Routebuilder different from http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/ http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/?
espin 11y ago
How is Routebuilder different from http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/ http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/?
declan 11y ago
Unfortunately I'd say the headline on the linked Medium.com post (by the creator of Routebuilder) is a bit misleading. I feel for the author, but Google is not "forcing Routebuilder to shut down." Google is instead telling the owner of Routebuilder to find another API to use. Routebuilder can find another API, pay to license data, etc. There are alternatives rather than "shut[ing] down." I know this probably sucks for the author, but this is the risk you take when building your product on top of someone else's API without a separate contract in hand--as many Twitter developers found out firsthand a few years ago. Their service, their rules.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  Isn't that a bit of a semantic nitpick? They're telling him to rework his site (or his business model) in fourteen days. Whether they have the right to treat developers on their platform like crud or not, it doesn't change the fact that he is effectively being shut down.
  - declan 11y ago
    If you had a dog walking service with a route that crossed my property without permission, and after some time I asked you not to do so, you might write a blog post trumpeting: "Property owner is shutting me down." But others might disagree. There may be ways to preserve the viability of your dog walking service. You can enter into an arrangement with me to use my property (which might include a nominal fee), you can take a different route (inconvenient for you and your customers, but not my problem), etc. If the only way you can run your dog walking service is to take a shortcut across my property without my permission, well, then the world is sending you a message about the viability of your business. Again, the mere fact that you and your dogs have grown accustomed to crossing my property does not mean I'm "shut[ing] you down." And next time, maybe you should secure written permission before starting a business based on the assumption that you'll have the right to use someone else's property forever without paying.
    - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
      I definitely think we'd be in a much better place if people building on platforms had the ability to negotiate for some level of assurance of continuity. It's important for people to have confidence in the platforms they build on. As an update, Google has backed down, and said they made an error, and they won't force RouteBuilder to shutter in the next two weeks. But it sounds like the developer has learned his lesson... as time permits, he's going to start working on moving to another platform.
whistlerbrk 11y ago
For crying out loud. They have billions and billions of dollars of cash on hand. Just do the right thing and buy the company. It looks good for them, it looks good for you, it looks good for the ecosystem. Just buy them!
- krapp 11y ago
  How would that be the right thing for Google? They don't need Routebuilder, and they don't need the PR boost. Google certainly doesn't need to set a precedent that any company that depends on their APIs can expect to be acquired if they violate their TOS long enough.
balls187 11y ago
Not a lawyer. My gut feel is Google writes their TOS that are concrete enough to be enforceable at some basic legal level, but vague enough to be a catch-all enforcement. It's crummy that Google is claiming that Routebuilder is violating their ToS, but not telling them how it's violating or why they have deemed Routebuilder a violate of that specific ToS clause. It definitely feels like large company bullying tactics, which are hard for small/medium and independent companies to fight, without investing (read: wasting) money on legal fees. This is less about "oh if you don't like the terms, build it yourself" but rather the spirit of which Google was founded. Facebook and Twitter have pulled this same nonsense as well: encourage all developers build their apps on top of their platforms, to help grow the active user base. Once they become critical mass/gate keepers, swing the doorshut for all except those who are willing to do everything that they are asked of. The kick in the balls is how Google built their organization on top of open-software, but now has adopted the same corporate policies that closed/proprietary software vendors like MSFT have used. "Do no evil."
- timonovici 11y ago
  Once you're no longer the underdog, your views on the world shift 180 degrees :) But worry not, everyone is riding a "sine wave" - Google comes, Google goes. There's some physics theory that applies here - entropy, I guess.
  - cornchips 11y ago
    "What goes up must come down." ― Isaac Newton
terrabakky 11y ago
I used to provide support on the Google Maps for Work API (any opinions are my own etc.) My best guess is that because the site is offering very similar functionality to what is provided by the Google Maps API Drawing Tools [1] is the reason you've been flagged. The Elevation chart appears to be the same as the sample provided in the API documentation [2]. Yes, you offer additional functionality with the sharing of the routes and other features on the site. The flagging of sites for TOS violations can be a bit peculiar at times. For reasons that I shouldn't get in to, I'd guess you won't much of a reply if you try and discuss this notice by replying via email. I'm not sure who the current Maps API Developer Relations contact is but they would be your best bet for any proper discussion. [1] - https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/examples/drawing-tools https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/... [2] -https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/examples/elevation-paths https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/...
cognivore 11y ago
"These people have forgotten that all application interfaces ... used to be “richer environments,” and the users abandoned them by the millions, in favor of the browser, the moment they got a chance" And then they abandoned the web browser in even larger numbers to download "apps," which provided a richer environment to interact with their portable personal computer (or "smartphone"). Web browsers absolutely suck for UI, and they're not redeemed by their lack of complexity. When there is a easy, viable, alternative to a web browser for a program to run on users's computers you'll see browsers dropped, and hopefully go back to what they were intended for - browsing interlinked documents.
buro9 11y ago
Isn't this interesting. Effectively Google are saying that they have rights over the design of the API interface. Yet isn't that their argument in the Oracle Java case, that an API itself isn't a protectable thing?
- teraflop 11y ago
  No, this has nothing to do with intellectual property rights. Google is not claiming any legal right to prevent anyone from creating something that looks like Google Maps. They're simply saying that they don't have to give you the Google Maps API for free to do so. Also, this is about a user interface, not an API.
kazinator 11y ago
Hmm, what about the Gmap Pedometer? http://www.gmap-pedometer.com http://www.gmap-pedometer.com There is nothing on that site, or its forum, about any impending shutdown. Been using that (on and off) for a very long time. The changelog goes back to mid-2005; just months after Google Maps was announced. This site lets you build routes and save them as permanent objects that you can share links to. It's useful for runners, cyclists, etc. Just trying RouteBuilder: looks like a knockoff of Gmap Pedometer, only capable of connecting straight line segments (doesn't follow roads). That is irrelevant though; both sites basically wrap Google Maps in the same way.
beedogs 11y ago
Do no evil, except for fucking over developers left and right.
omegote 11y ago
Well there are other apps that perform similar as op's, for instance the software Tyre - which they charge for by the way. Looks like you've gotten too popular...
Perixoog 11y ago
>One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run >on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home >and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or >energy. Just install UMap instead. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UMap https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UMap https://github.com/umap-project/umap https://github.com/umap-project/umap
lowglow 11y ago
This is exactly the reason why Playa's building Terms of Service that are friendly to developers. I got tired of people building great apps, only to have the platform shut them down, or worse, blatantly rip them off. Our platform promises never to compete with anyone building working products on top of the platform. I want people to do well, grow a business, and build something with their time that works for them. Playa is made by hackers, for hackers. I asked for feedback on some of these concepts a couple of weeks back, add to it if you'd like and help lay down the foundation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AgYQ3f61Yrk_HXSbdZtCRyiuIvikkHNqbBislGp03Ow/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AgYQ3f61Yrk_HXSbdZtCRyiu...
jamest 11y ago
[posting on behalf of my colleague @ Google] Hi everyone, Google Product Manager for Maps APIs here. We are not revoking Routebuilder’s access to the Maps API. Unfortunately, we mistakenly sent a letter to Routebuilder saying that they were in violation of the Google Maps API terms of service. This was an error. Once the developer contacted us about this issue, we replied apologizing for the misunderstanding and confirming that we would not be revoking his access to the Maps API. (He contacted us on Friday, we replied on Monday, the blog post was published on the weekend.) We’re really glad he let us know so we could fix the issue and we encourage any developers that have issues in future to reach out to us so we can help. Developers who want to contact the Google Maps APIs team: Stack Overflow and our issue tracker forum (https://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/ https://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/) are both monitored by the Google Maps team weekly.
- adsenseclient 11y ago
  Hahaha. We have been through this with AdSense. Without the negative PR Google would have never replied. This is also a good lesson for the aspiring Play Store Android developers.

491 points by Jerry2 11y ago

It took Google a decade to decide this site was violating the Terms of Service. Routebuilder does one narrow thing, it's not like they've creeped into Google's territory over the years. Something's fishy -- someone on slashdot suggested that it could be because of google's new fitness trackers (http://fit.google.com http://fit.google.com) that they're flushing out any sites at all similar. If that's the case, then sites like routebuilder should be grandfathered into the TOS.

LoSboccacc 11y ago
I would call that business as usual, more than fishy - those megacorp (MS, Apple, Google) have a long track of killing competitors before entering their space if at all possible, even if that means acquiring the whole business to close it down.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
A violation is a violation, period. Yeah maybe it sucks but it violates their terms, what do you expect? It's not going to be grandfathered in. No one does that because now you have exceptions to your terms of service. Likely it was a violation back in 2006 as well in which case there would obviously be no exceptions granted anyway. It's not like Google had the website sitting in a queue to be checked for violations and it took a decade to get to it. They likely hadn't looked at it at all, didn't run an audit on it etc. Google is a big company, is it really that unreasonable that it may have taken a decade before finding the violation?

kennydude 11y ago

Could it not be moved to Mapbox or OSM directly?

virmundi 11y ago
Or MapQuest. People forget about them but they have open maps.
- Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
  MapQuest's open mapping initiatives are basically becoming a wrapper around Mapbox. I wouldn't build anything on MapQuest Open today, sadly.
  - sethd 11y ago
    Are you sure they are using Mapbox (the commercial service)? I thought it was all based on OpenStreetMap data.
    - Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
      Previously they ran their own stack based on OSM data, but they're now moving to use Mapbox's stack (which of course is also founded on OSM): https://www.mapbox.com/blog/mapquest/ https://www.mapbox.com/blog/mapquest/
      - sethd 11y ago
        I read that link but it doesn't say anything about MapQuest Open using Mapbox and only discusses their consumer product: http://www.mapquest.com http://www.mapquest.com MapQuest Open is separate from their main product and commercial developer offerings: http://open.mapquest.com http://open.mapquest.com I don't see anything on the MapQuest Open website that indicates they use Mapbox to serve their OSM tiles.
us0r 11y ago
From the article: "One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or energy."

dragonsh 11y ago

Don't trust for profit organizations. Google might project itself as champion of open source but the reality is their revenue, is a result of standing on open source. Without gnu and Linux they will not even exist. When they needed google maps users they opened up. But given their profit motive they will have to shut down others which conflict with their profit. Its better to port service to something open source, like openstreetmap. Google is turning into, do every evil to generate value for shareholders. I think RMS fears of closed source js are true. It's like Windows Binary blobs.

hawski 11y ago
Honest question: why Google couldn't exist with FreeBSD instead of GNU and Linux? I assume that only GCC would be used in that case.
- dragonsh 11y ago
  During time when Sergei and Larry wrote code for Google. It won't have been possible for them to survive without huge costs, if not using gnu tools and many gpl utilities, bsd code is their but not as much at that time. Moreover using bsd and then earning by making it closed source is even worse without contributing back. Indeed for that matter even today they won't survive without gpl code. The amount of gpl code used within Google compared to the code they contributed back you will still see a huge gap.
hellbanner 11y ago
I've tried using OpenStreetMap -- but it doesn't seem to know the names of places I go to, or sometimes even the area I'm in when I type certain city names. maps.google.com works great though. I wish I wasn't supporting Google's massive operations but it is convenient to use.
- jcoyne 11y ago
  Have you looked at http://www.geonames.org/ http://www.geonames.org/ ?

dpcan 11y ago

What's the whole story here? Is it because he created a way for people to create routes, and is not using the official Google Maps API method for creating/showing routes? If he just altered his app to use Google's approved method, would he be fine?

andrewguenther 11y ago
Google Maps already provides a way for you to share routes, Routebuilder is duplicating that functionality (even if it makes it easier) which is a violation of Google Maps' ToS.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  Being better than Google is clearly a reason Google would want to shut you down.
- Someone1234 11y ago
  > Google Maps already provides a way for you to share routes Does it? Where? Map Maker doesn't do what the article claims it does. It doesn't try to reproduce Routebuilder at all. It allows you to fix errors in Google Map's data, it isn't useful for creating new custom routes for specific purposes (e.g. races, sightseeing, etc).
  - teraflop 11y ago
    The author might have been thinking of the similarly-named "My Maps".
  - kbrosnan 11y ago
    Here is an example of a Google maps route from Providence to Boston for bicycling, https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en-US&mid=zH358fz1z920.kAlJZ89Jw4Kc https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en-US&mid=zH358fz1z920...
pmontra 11y ago
They are not routes. They are pins connected by straight lines. The screenshot in the post doesn't reflect the reality of the service. Try clicking on NYC, Washington DC, Detroit and Boston and see the route. Prepare to do some swimming :-) That's by design. From the FAQ: > How come if I click on two points along a curvy road, the line doesn't follow the curvature of the road? > Two reasons. First, Google doesn't provide an interface to the road data, so I have no way of knowing if you clicked on a road or not, nor do I know where the road twists and turns. > Second, many people create routes that go off-road (e.g. to plot a hiking path). These people wouldn't want RouteBuilder to follow along a road anyway. From the wording of the mail and of the ToS [1] I don't think that it would make any difference if he used the Google Directions API [2]. Actually, after reading that letter I wonder what developers can use that API for, if not for eventually getting that letter. [1] https://developers.google.com/maps/terms#section_10_4 https://developers.google.com/maps/terms#section_10_4 [2] https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/directions/intro?hl=en https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/directions/...

blindfly 11y ago

I can't tell how this Routebuilder thing is any better than just right clicking and 'distance to here'?

maxerickson 11y ago
There is an option in the context menu on maps.google.com "Measure distance" that it overlaps with even more. No obvious way to share the measured Google path though.

basseq 11y ago

Just because Routebuilder was never called out for violating the ToS doesn't mean it wasn't. Nor is there a "statute of limitations" for violations. What's even more insidious is that the "duplicating GM functionality" is a) vague and b) a moving target. Just because Routebuilder wasn't violating a decade ago doesn't mean it's not violating now. This is the risk you take building something on top of an API—access can be cut off at any time.

JustSomeNobody 11y ago
>> This is the risk you take building something on top of an API—access can be cut off at any time. This simply cannot be stressed enough.
- basseq 11y ago
  It's worth expanding that this is a very broad spectrum of software. No one's worried about assembly code for Intel chips, but the next generation could be locked down. No one's worried about writing C++ for Windows, but technically you're using their APIs and hooks that could be dropped in the next release. There's iOS, where you're also subject to review and approval. There's well-known web joints like Google, where this can happen. Then there's the fly-by-night shops that could just dissolve tomorrow. The safest thing is to build your own computer from silicon, write your own OS, your own compilers, your own languages, your own software, and your own APIs. Of course, by the time you do that, we'll all be dead. So it's a balancing act. But it's worth illustrating that you're taking for granted that things will remain the same forever, when in reality there's a sliding scale of risk.
  - cookiecaper 11y ago
    Free software ameliorates this problem. The code is free to live on independent of its authors or parent organization. Sun may or may not have killed its business by making all of its software open and free, but the community benefited from that immensely when Oracle took over. We don't have to start from scratch, just have to use free software. Your post also seems to assume that everyone will upgrade to the "next release". On platforms where you get to control your upgrade cycle, people won't upgrade if the upgrade breaks the programs they want to use, and this acts as a check on gratuitous API/ABI breakage. Microsoft takes this extremely seriously and has hardly any API breakage over the last 20 years because they know that there's a real threat that a competitor could emerge with WINE pre-bundled and take away some market share if they break a lot of programs.

timlyo 11y ago

I wonder how easily they could switch to open street map.

rplnt 11y ago

The most interesting part about this story for me is that Google reached out to them and didn't simply ban them without a notice or explanation.

dclowd9901 11y ago
But it's completely unilateral. They're ignoring him otherwise.
- gist 11y ago
  OP said: > I have tried emailing the Google Maps team to plead my case, but my correspondence went unanswered. Where did they write? How many times did they write? How long ago did they write? Did they try any other means of contact? Did they try to go through, as only one example, linkedin and find someone that way (or any other way of researching a party that might be willing to help)? It's unclear the effort that was put in here. Maybe it was maybe it wasn't. We don't have enough detail. Simply saying "my correspondance went unanswered" as much as we may think Google doesn't care doesn't prove that point. I actually from time to time write to companies to try and sell them things. I put in effort and it appears that that greatly increases the chance that they will buy what I am trying to sell to them (meaning a decision maker not a clerk or the person who sorts thorough the spam). And email more than one time for that matter. And if it's really important try a phone call.
- nathancahill 11y ago
  U N I L A T E R A L N I L A T E R A L
  - dang 11y ago
    Please don't do this here.

specialdragon 11y ago

"One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or energy." - Open source it (with or without the wrapper to Google Maps).

bambax 11y ago

Email from Google doesn't state what feature(s) they feel is replicated by the site, which is strange. I wonder if it has something to do with elevation? For some reason it seems GMaps is very protective about elevation data; if the site recently gained some momentum and they noticed many elevation requests, maybe it could explain this sudden (late) reaction?

tonfa 11y ago
I'm not even sure how the site differs from a site like http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/ http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/ (afaik it also allows the share the routes).

franze 11y ago

I wrote this 1689 days ago: "Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again?" http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for-some-of-our-apis.html?showComment=1306481143396&m=1#c3564212561169948866 http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for... Still true. HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2592399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2592399

javajosh 11y ago
It's all well and good to say "never use a Google API again because they might eliminate for any reason at any time" but there might not be an alternative. It's hard to get the data. Concentration of data is made concentration of wealth through APIs (or, slightly more indirectly, through the apps that use the APIs, perhaps internally). No-one concentrates data more thoroughly than Google (it's hard to appreciate how much data Google has; it started with scraping the web, but now they have real-time data on millions of sites through analytics, pictures of streets, WiFi ssid against lat/lon, and of course detailed video-viewing habits). The short-term consumer cycle is feeding a long-term data cycle that strongly favors consolidation. That's bad. Personally I think it's okay to "feed the beast" for a little while, but as soon as you get uptake and can afford the time you can and should stop feeding the beast.
icebraining 11y ago
Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again? Because you get a free high quality Maps API to use for a decade? What else would you have used in 2006?
- Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
  Back in 2006 a bunch of us were building OSM precisely so this wouldn't be a problem in the future. But I take your point.
adevine 11y ago
Because your options are usually: 1. Try to do it yourself or find another service, which will usually result in much higher cost and a worse implementation, or 2. Use the Google API, with the cost of lock-in. I think the best solution is to always wrap the Google API with a generic facade, so if you do have to replace the API with something down the line it is at least possible. There are some APIs out there that already do this (e.g. http://mapstraction.com/ http://mapstraction.com/ )

Zyst 11y ago

I don't think Google is in the wrong here: If you have a route between two points 'white dots' appear in the route, then you can drag and drop those around to manually change the route, to share the URL you can either copy the url at the top bar or just click the 'share' option inside the hamburger menu, which gives you a minified link. In the end, although it's an inferior(?) implementation, Google allows you to do the exact same thing. I think the ToS call mentioned is essentially appropriate. Although it is a bit of a dick move, but in the end it is their api.

pmontra 11y ago
It's a vastly inferior implementation. Despite what the screenshot in the post hints to, the actual implementation only lets users connect the pins by straight lines. It doesn't follow roads and it doesn't do navigation. The reason for that is explained in the FAQ. So it's more or less what anybody would do on day 2 of learning the Google Maps API, plus the save routes (cough...) thing. With that I don't intend to show disrespect for the author, because it has been going on for 10 years with people using it. Much better than anything I built for myself. I'm surprised that Google is going after him. If that "re-implements or duplicates" anything that Google does then almost everybody should receive a letter like that. My guess is that the usage counter for this site eventually reached some limit (10 years for that), a program noticed and the legal department sent a semi automatic mail without an assessment of the service. Still it's probably in their right to do so and it's another reason to use Open Street Map to build this kind of services. Example: http://cycle.travel/ http://cycle.travel/ which does real routing. Furthermore OSM has many offroad tracks and it could make happy the kind of people using routebuilder.

theaccordance 11y ago

Pretty sure that Under Armor's MapMyFitness webapp has a route builder that uses the Google Maps API as well

RyanMcGreal 11y ago

An oldie but a goodie: Are You a Sharecropper? If you’re developing software for the Windows platform, yes. Or for the Apple platform, or the Oracle platform, or the SAP platform, or, well, any platform that is owned and operated by a company. They own the ground you’re building on, and if they decide they don’t like you, or they can do something better with the ground, you’re toast. They can ship their own product and give it away till you go bust, then start charging for it; and use secret APIs you can’t see; and they can break the published APIs you use. All of these things have historically been done by platform vendors. https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePl...

wvenable 11y ago
The issue that this application, for example, wouldn't exist at all if it couldn't rely on Google's services. (Unlike, say, most Facebook games). So the option is either build nothing or build something and risk it being taken away.
- ajross 11y ago
  What specifically does the OSM platform and related projects lack that it requires? I mean, yes: Google Maps is the premier consumer mapping service out there, but it's not like the market is completely unserved by free alternatives.
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    The app was written a decade ago; likely there wasn't any available APIs the OP could have used (or he may not have been aware of them if they existed). Now he doesn't have time to transition to a new set of APIs. Yeah plenty of alternatives now but does it really matter in this situation? Not really in my opinion.
    - MatthewPhillips 11y ago
      So what's the issue here? Apps do not continue to exist in perpetuity without maintenance. If he can't afford the maintenance cost (understandable) then the app is going to eventually stop working anyways.

atorralb 11y ago

this also applies for people who use their cdn for fonts or scripts. developers, please stop using google as a cdn.

kregasaurusrex 11y ago

I used to use http://runningmap.com/ http://runningmap.com/ to plan out routes for short-distance running in my neighborhood; but they stopped updating the site and my guess is their API key had gotten revoked as well.

udioron 11y ago

It should be quite easy to port your app to use leaflet.js[1] and openstreetmap/mapbox. [1] http://leafletjs.com/ http://leafletjs.com/

vortico 11y ago
I agree, these are fantastic projects/technologies that offer even more configurability than the Google Maps API. Porting the central part of a large company may be a challenge though, since Google Maps is so integrated into the site.
dopamean 11y ago
I second this as a frequent user of leaflet and openstreatmap. I started using both about 2 years ago and it's remarkable how much progress has been made in such a short amount of time.

bitL 11y ago

Anyone still finds Google relevant for anything? They are making sure nobody wants to be their friend again. Search got so bad in the past few years ("bbut our metrics show it's more relevant than evar!") that DDG doesn't even have to try. Sad. Lately if I want to watch YouTube, I have to agree to their privacy policies. If I turn off everything, I have to do the same a few days later. Antipatterns everywhere... What happened to you guys? We want the great old Google back please!

toxik 11y ago
Sorry, but this is absurd. DuckDuckGo is nowhere near Google in terms of revenue, brand trust, and most importantly: search result relevance.
- bitL 11y ago
  The point is that DDG is now "good enough". I am also a bit unhappy they are embracing some approaches that made Google worse though... And Google - the only profitable part is their search + ads. If they let this slip, what would remain? A hollow shelf like when SUN imploded?

jitendrac 11y ago

Currently your site is violating the terms of google map usage. you can not ask them to allow you to keep on violating their terms. The better solution would be to write them the letter to allow you to implement the functionality of your own with in some specific time period (may be 1 month) Then, Create your own solution on some open standards or tech I recommend you to use openstreetmap mbtiles(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MBTiles http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MBTiles) I have worked with them, they are tricky but really great.

Ensorceled 11y ago
Why, exactly, can't he ask them if can keep on violating their terms? I don't get this attitude, Google is well within their rights to shut him down. He's well within his rights to ask for forgiveness and to complain about Google if they don't. They're a corporation, not some feudal lord that is owed fealty.
- jitendrac 11y ago
  Google Map and its services are the intellectual property of google.They may setup any rules and terms they want for their service regulation(also to prevent any misuse of service).
  - Ensorceled 11y ago
    Yes, yes. We all agree on that. By why are you saying that " you can not ask them to allow you to keep on violating their terms". Why is asking them for an exception forbidden?

crikli 11y ago

I'm unclear as to how the Google's ToS are being violated. He's not reimplementing anything that Google has provided. If I want to create a route from my condo down to the walking path, along the path to the high school, and back to my place there is not a way to do this within Google Maps. I use this service quite frequently when traveling and my training schedule says "2.0 mile run" or whatever. I can create a circuitous route starting/ending at my hotel. Not a way to really do this in Google Maps. So, again, how is clause 10.4(c) being violated?

soylentcola 11y ago
Maybe I misunderstood your example but I've always found this to be pretty easy in Google Maps. I just picked a random spot on the map where there was a park (with some walking paths) and made a custom route. Took longer to pick a location for the example than it took to make the map: https://goo.gl/5TcdGz https://goo.gl/5TcdGz
- crikli 11y ago
  I must be dense then. I'm unable to figure out how to do this.
  - soylentcola 11y ago
    Open Google Maps in a browser. Enter your starting location. Find points along your path, right click, and choose "add destination". Repeat until you have your path. Then you can click and drag the blue line of the path if you want to take a different route than the one that is auto-generated. If you choose "walking" instead of driving or transit it will include any walking paths in the database.

lifeisstillgood 11y ago

This is the very early signs of a trend that is going to grow - the conversion of private conquest of the Internet into public goods. Google has two huge advantages in search - they have scraped links off every web page, which can be replicated (see Bing, DuckDuckGo) and they have user behaviour visiting those pages (did they immediately return to results page after hitting ,#1?) There are good arguments to be made that both data sets are public goods, and indeed that it was unfair to use user generated content / data without licensing There are of course arguments to the contrary. but googles jewels are too valuable to be left alone for lomg

outside1234 11y ago

Just move on to Open Street Maps.

dawnbreez 11y ago

It used to be that Google didn't play dirty. When did that change?

ocdtrekkie 11y ago
When Larry Page became CEO, basically.
- wangii 11y ago
  When Google was no longer growing rapidly. The gravity crushed ideology.
  - awqrre 11y ago
    Was that at the same time that they dropped their "Don't be evil" motto?
ausjke 11y ago
since they removed the 'do not be evil' slogan? just move to openstreetmap and ditch google map api.

burritojustice 11y ago

open > proprietary: If you want routing (and elevation and a time-distance matrix) based on open data, via an API with liberal licensing, all based on open source code that you could run yourself if you wanted, you may want to take a look at Mapzen's Turn-by-Turn routing. We built it to get away from this kind of thing. more here: https://mapzen.com/projects/valhalla https://mapzen.com/projects/valhalla docs: https://mapzen.com/documentation/turn-by-turn/ https://mapzen.com/documentation/turn-by-turn/ API: https://mapzen.com/developers/ https://mapzen.com/developers/

fixermark 11y ago
Mapzen seems like a good idea, but I can't help but wonder (with respect): Can a developer expect it to be here in 2026? Seems like someone integrating against an API has the choice of "Use one from a big company with a proven business model and risk their TOS changing to have it taken away" vs. "Use one from a firm with only a few years of history and risk them going dark one day (or changing their TOS)." In this specific scenario, I'm not sure that this solution would guarantee the developer could have avoided this failure mode.
- HaloZero 11y ago
  You're right, it's a bit of Catch-22. But the benefits of using the open approach though is that it helps promote them which could help get them marketshare/mindshare and help bring attention/support to them. At least that's what i'm hoping would be the case.
- burritojustice 11y ago
  A great question. That's why we make all the underlying source code open, including chef and docker config info for people to build it themselves if they want or need to. https://github.com/valhalla/ https://github.com/valhalla/ We at Mapzen are explicitly designing our projects to outlast us (if necessary). https://mapzen.com/blog/our-magna-carto https://mapzen.com/blog/our-magna-carto
  - mikeg8 11y ago

SFjulie1 11y ago

Nul ne peut se prévaloir de ses propres turpitudes. No one can prevail that a successful lasting violation of law worth recognition of it as an accepted legal usage. (Except if you are rich and have guns because when it comes to owning lands, occupying long enough a place is legally owning). I do agree that the ToS are shit. They were since the beginning. What new brands are doing is called : claiming rights on the second creation. They give you proprietary shovels with open API to rush for gold, and once you have taken the risks and you can make money they can decide to let you live or not. People laughed at me 10 years ago with this topic. Entrepreunariat is about being a jake of all trades. You cannot be weak neither in coding, nor economy, nor business, nor accounting, nor legal contracts. You skipped "the leg days" of business. Reading the contracts and evaluating the risks, assessing the uncertainties. And you failed. Well. Blame it on you and your blindness. Don't appeal to my pity. Vae Victis. That is the way of business, and you should take responsibility for your own bad choices and understand that with great power comes more painful arrows in the knees. All people supporting your claims should rather also think of the consequences of sustaining unsound business practices. If you would win, it would be yet another loss for all of a fair competition on the market. I actually love your idea and have a lot of respect for your realization. Building is great. Making lasting products and risk management is even more important. So, please shutdown your site and share the depressing conclusions you will come to. Learn like a true entrepreneur, and go back to work with your newly acquired knowledge, and think of whether or not you can rebuild your product on better foundations. Success is not what make business man. It is overcoming your failure. The only true capital of a business man is fortitude.

AKifer 11y ago
Well said, learn and look forward, that's the only way.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

espin 11y ago

How is Routebuilder different from http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/ http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/?

espin 11y ago

How is Routebuilder different from http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/ http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/?

declan 11y ago

Unfortunately I'd say the headline on the linked Medium.com post (by the creator of Routebuilder) is a bit misleading. I feel for the author, but Google is not "forcing Routebuilder to shut down." Google is instead telling the owner of Routebuilder to find another API to use. Routebuilder can find another API, pay to license data, etc. There are alternatives rather than "shut[ing] down." I know this probably sucks for the author, but this is the risk you take when building your product on top of someone else's API without a separate contract in hand--as many Twitter developers found out firsthand a few years ago. Their service, their rules.

ocdtrekkie 11y ago
Isn't that a bit of a semantic nitpick? They're telling him to rework his site (or his business model) in fourteen days. Whether they have the right to treat developers on their platform like crud or not, it doesn't change the fact that he is effectively being shut down.
- declan 11y ago
  If you had a dog walking service with a route that crossed my property without permission, and after some time I asked you not to do so, you might write a blog post trumpeting: "Property owner is shutting me down." But others might disagree. There may be ways to preserve the viability of your dog walking service. You can enter into an arrangement with me to use my property (which might include a nominal fee), you can take a different route (inconvenient for you and your customers, but not my problem), etc. If the only way you can run your dog walking service is to take a shortcut across my property without my permission, well, then the world is sending you a message about the viability of your business. Again, the mere fact that you and your dogs have grown accustomed to crossing my property does not mean I'm "shut[ing] you down." And next time, maybe you should secure written permission before starting a business based on the assumption that you'll have the right to use someone else's property forever without paying.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    I definitely think we'd be in a much better place if people building on platforms had the ability to negotiate for some level of assurance of continuity. It's important for people to have confidence in the platforms they build on. As an update, Google has backed down, and said they made an error, and they won't force RouteBuilder to shutter in the next two weeks. But it sounds like the developer has learned his lesson... as time permits, he's going to start working on moving to another platform.

whistlerbrk 11y ago

For crying out loud. They have billions and billions of dollars of cash on hand. Just do the right thing and buy the company. It looks good for them, it looks good for you, it looks good for the ecosystem. Just buy them!

krapp 11y ago
How would that be the right thing for Google? They don't need Routebuilder, and they don't need the PR boost. Google certainly doesn't need to set a precedent that any company that depends on their APIs can expect to be acquired if they violate their TOS long enough.

balls187 11y ago

Not a lawyer. My gut feel is Google writes their TOS that are concrete enough to be enforceable at some basic legal level, but vague enough to be a catch-all enforcement. It's crummy that Google is claiming that Routebuilder is violating their ToS, but not telling them how it's violating or why they have deemed Routebuilder a violate of that specific ToS clause. It definitely feels like large company bullying tactics, which are hard for small/medium and independent companies to fight, without investing (read: wasting) money on legal fees. This is less about "oh if you don't like the terms, build it yourself" but rather the spirit of which Google was founded. Facebook and Twitter have pulled this same nonsense as well: encourage all developers build their apps on top of their platforms, to help grow the active user base. Once they become critical mass/gate keepers, swing the doorshut for all except those who are willing to do everything that they are asked of. The kick in the balls is how Google built their organization on top of open-software, but now has adopted the same corporate policies that closed/proprietary software vendors like MSFT have used. "Do no evil."

timonovici 11y ago
Once you're no longer the underdog, your views on the world shift 180 degrees :) But worry not, everyone is riding a "sine wave" - Google comes, Google goes. There's some physics theory that applies here - entropy, I guess.
- cornchips 11y ago
  "What goes up must come down." ― Isaac Newton

terrabakky 11y ago

I used to provide support on the Google Maps for Work API (any opinions are my own etc.) My best guess is that because the site is offering very similar functionality to what is provided by the Google Maps API Drawing Tools [1] is the reason you've been flagged. The Elevation chart appears to be the same as the sample provided in the API documentation [2]. Yes, you offer additional functionality with the sharing of the routes and other features on the site. The flagging of sites for TOS violations can be a bit peculiar at times. For reasons that I shouldn't get in to, I'd guess you won't much of a reply if you try and discuss this notice by replying via email. I'm not sure who the current Maps API Developer Relations contact is but they would be your best bet for any proper discussion. [1] - https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/examples/drawing-tools https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/... [2] -https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/examples/elevation-paths https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/...

cognivore 11y ago

"These people have forgotten that all application interfaces ... used to be “richer environments,” and the users abandoned them by the millions, in favor of the browser, the moment they got a chance" And then they abandoned the web browser in even larger numbers to download "apps," which provided a richer environment to interact with their portable personal computer (or "smartphone"). Web browsers absolutely suck for UI, and they're not redeemed by their lack of complexity. When there is a easy, viable, alternative to a web browser for a program to run on users's computers you'll see browsers dropped, and hopefully go back to what they were intended for - browsing interlinked documents.

buro9 11y ago

Isn't this interesting. Effectively Google are saying that they have rights over the design of the API interface. Yet isn't that their argument in the Oracle Java case, that an API itself isn't a protectable thing?

teraflop 11y ago
No, this has nothing to do with intellectual property rights. Google is not claiming any legal right to prevent anyone from creating something that looks like Google Maps. They're simply saying that they don't have to give you the Google Maps API for free to do so. Also, this is about a user interface, not an API.

kazinator 11y ago

Hmm, what about the Gmap Pedometer? http://www.gmap-pedometer.com http://www.gmap-pedometer.com There is nothing on that site, or its forum, about any impending shutdown. Been using that (on and off) for a very long time. The changelog goes back to mid-2005; just months after Google Maps was announced. This site lets you build routes and save them as permanent objects that you can share links to. It's useful for runners, cyclists, etc. Just trying RouteBuilder: looks like a knockoff of Gmap Pedometer, only capable of connecting straight line segments (doesn't follow roads). That is irrelevant though; both sites basically wrap Google Maps in the same way.

beedogs 11y ago

Do no evil, except for fucking over developers left and right.

omegote 11y ago

Well there are other apps that perform similar as op's, for instance the software Tyre - which they charge for by the way. Looks like you've gotten too popular...

Perixoog 11y ago

>One option for me would be to rewrite routebuilder to run >on another mapping platform, but with an infant at home >and a full-time job, I frankly don’t have the time or >energy. Just install UMap instead. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UMap https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UMap https://github.com/umap-project/umap https://github.com/umap-project/umap

lowglow 11y ago

This is exactly the reason why Playa's building Terms of Service that are friendly to developers. I got tired of people building great apps, only to have the platform shut them down, or worse, blatantly rip them off. Our platform promises never to compete with anyone building working products on top of the platform. I want people to do well, grow a business, and build something with their time that works for them. Playa is made by hackers, for hackers. I asked for feedback on some of these concepts a couple of weeks back, add to it if you'd like and help lay down the foundation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AgYQ3f61Yrk_HXSbdZtCRyiuIvikkHNqbBislGp03Ow/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AgYQ3f61Yrk_HXSbdZtCRyiu...

jamest 11y ago

[posting on behalf of my colleague @ Google] Hi everyone, Google Product Manager for Maps APIs here. We are not revoking Routebuilder’s access to the Maps API. Unfortunately, we mistakenly sent a letter to Routebuilder saying that they were in violation of the Google Maps API terms of service. This was an error. Once the developer contacted us about this issue, we replied apologizing for the misunderstanding and confirming that we would not be revoking his access to the Maps API. (He contacted us on Friday, we replied on Monday, the blog post was published on the weekend.) We’re really glad he let us know so we could fix the issue and we encourage any developers that have issues in future to reach out to us so we can help. Developers who want to contact the Google Maps APIs team: Stack Overflow and our issue tracker forum (https://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/ https://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/) are both monitored by the Google Maps team weekly.

adsenseclient 11y ago
Hahaha. We have been through this with AdSense. Without the negative PR Google would have never replied. This is also a good lesson for the aspiring Play Store Android developers.