5 ms·
It's interesting because I'm fairly sure that work has already been done. Even without criticising the geocoding itself, the fact that there are singlular/plur
by regularfry 3y ago
It's interesting because I'm fairly sure that work has already been done. Even without criticising the geocoding itself, the fact that there are singlular/plural pairs in the word list along with easily-confusable homophones says a lot about the product.
- paulgb 3y agoIt looks like a security researcher has looked into it and was threatened with legal action for releasing his source code. https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/why-what3words-is-not-suitable-for-safety-critical-applications/ https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/why-what3words-is-not-su... https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/what3words-legal-threat-whatfreewords/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/what3words-legal-threat-wh... Edit: initially I said “sued”, which was inaccurate. And the repo included the proprietary word list, not just code.
- regularfry 3y agoWell, threatened with legal action and wasn't up for fighting it. It didn't get as far as him being sued, and while I can't blame him in the slightest for that choice, I would have been absolutely fascinated if it did go to court. A compatible reimplementation of something that's being sold to emergency services being slapped down because it's compatible sounds like the sort of thing useful precedent could have come out of.
- jonatron 3y agoYour own previous comment doesn't match this take: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21218385 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21218385
- paulgb 3y agoAh, you got me! I didn’t realize from reading the TechCrunch article that the repo contained the actual word list, I stand by my original opinion that the takedown was legally valid.
- kryptiskt 3y agoBased on what law? You can't copyright mere facts like a list of words.
- growse 3y agoIf creative effort was involved in curating that list, sure you can. A book is just a list of words.
- paulgb 3y agoYou can't copyright the GPS coordinates of cities, because those are facts. The data would be the same whether you compiled it or not, and it would be absurd to grant someone a monopoly on that data. If you compile a word list yourself, you've created something that doesn't describe the factual state of the world; you've created something new. FWIW, before the debacle, even the (apparent) author of it appears to have admitted that it flaunted copyright: > FWIW, I have reverse-engineered the what3words address decoding algorithm. If anyone else with the luxury of flaunting patents and copyrights is curious, check out the demo at https://cardinalhood.github.io/what3words/ https://cardinalhood.github.io/what3words/. It’s written in JS, and runs in browsers and Node.js. https://blog.ldodds.com/2016/06/14/what-3-words-jog-on-mate/ https://blog.ldodds.com/2016/06/14/what-3-words-jog-on-mate/
- mjg59 3y agoWhether or not a collection of facts can be subject to copyright varies across jurisdiction - in the US you can't copyright the phone book, while the EU has a specific concept of database rights. What's critical in the US case is whether there's any creative expression in the collection of facts or whether it's effectively mechanical, and whether the w3w wordlist would be protected under that would seem like an interesting case.
- 1970-01-01 3y agoI believe it's patent infringement. You should never give all the secrets of your patented device away, just the concept to secure the patent.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]