Google vs. gaia
Sunday, November 26. 2006, 14:22
Google has the reputation to be free software-friendly. Without doubt they did a lot in the past, especially many Summer of Code-Projects, that developed essential features for free software projects.
That google is also willing to put legal threat on free software projects if they compete in their are, they recently showed against the project gaia. It was a project to have a replacement client for google earth (google's own client is proprietary). It was done by pure reverse engineering. The author took the project down after he received a letter from google.
It's quite questionable if gaia is doing anything illegal. They didn't use any data from google, they just provided another client for the service. In my opinion it's very important to fight for the right to reverse engineer. Many essential free software projects wouldn't exist if we couldn't reverse engineer. Just think of many hardware drivers, filesystem support, samba, many multimedia codecs, support for proprietary document formats (e. g. doc in OOo) and lot's more.
By the way, I took the freedom to host a copy of the latest gaia-version (and, as requested by some comments, the win32-patch for gaia). It's GPL, so everyone is free to continue the development.
That google is also willing to put legal threat on free software projects if they compete in their are, they recently showed against the project gaia. It was a project to have a replacement client for google earth (google's own client is proprietary). It was done by pure reverse engineering. The author took the project down after he received a letter from google.
It's quite questionable if gaia is doing anything illegal. They didn't use any data from google, they just provided another client for the service. In my opinion it's very important to fight for the right to reverse engineer. Many essential free software projects wouldn't exist if we couldn't reverse engineer. Just think of many hardware drivers, filesystem support, samba, many multimedia codecs, support for proprietary document formats (e. g. doc in OOo) and lot's more.
By the way, I took the freedom to host a copy of the latest gaia-version (and, as requested by some comments, the win32-patch for gaia). It's GPL, so everyone is free to continue the development.
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Just a short note. I looked around a bit about this and it seems like the issue isn't with Google but in the agreements they have with the owners of the data. Google doesn't own all those satellite images, they license them, and for some reason the re-use of them that Gaia did is not ok, even if it's totally non-commercial. If Google violates their agreement by letting Gaia use the images, they might have to stop using them for Google Earth too. Better to at least be able to use G.E on Linux for free, even if it's not OSS, than nothing. World Wind and Microsoft Live Local are .NET windows only.
Btw, who has the rights to the World Wind images? Nasa? Maybe Gaia can switch to that. At least there you can download the complete source... :-)
Btw, who has the rights to the World Wind images? Nasa? Maybe Gaia can switch to that. At least there you can download the complete source... :-)
#1
C.M
on
2006-11-26 15:07
Thanks for mirroring.
#1.1
Dan the man
on
2007-09-13 08:01
I second C.M's comments, and if you take a look at the Gaia homepage now, you'll see the actual letter the Google Eng. (note: not attorney) sent to him.
It's NOT about the GPL of the software, nor even the reverse eng. It's most critically about the fact that the data is not owned by Google, and is allowed by it's host companies to be used under the restrictions Google alludes to in it's letter, and which the Gaia project cracked. It's not about the code, it's about the data the code uses, and even more about losing the rights for that code to go out as freely as it already does.
Google may have a number of faults, yet they have, to my knowledge, never squashed even semi-legitimate uses of their services. Gmail has many projects attached to it, despite the fact that there's no API, and the Google Maps APIs themselves were created in response to the many hacks built upon that service.
I urge you to re-read the Gaia homepage, and consider anew your initial reactions to this issue.
It's NOT about the GPL of the software, nor even the reverse eng. It's most critically about the fact that the data is not owned by Google, and is allowed by it's host companies to be used under the restrictions Google alludes to in it's letter, and which the Gaia project cracked. It's not about the code, it's about the data the code uses, and even more about losing the rights for that code to go out as freely as it already does.
Google may have a number of faults, yet they have, to my knowledge, never squashed even semi-legitimate uses of their services. Gmail has many projects attached to it, despite the fact that there's no API, and the Google Maps APIs themselves were created in response to the many hacks built upon that service.
I urge you to re-read the Gaia homepage, and consider anew your initial reactions to this issue.
Do you understand WHY Google is doing what it's doing?
If you want to attack someone about this issue, attack Navteq, who provides most of Google's satellite imaging. And learn reading comprehension.
Taking a stab at Google - the most effective proponent of open access to information to grace the face of this planet so far - because it's stuck between a rock and a hard place because they're providing you free access to data under a restrictive license - is pretty close to shooting yourself in the foot.
If you want to attack someone about this issue, attack Navteq, who provides most of Google's satellite imaging. And learn reading comprehension.
Taking a stab at Google - the most effective proponent of open access to information to grace the face of this planet so far - because it's stuck between a rock and a hard place because they're providing you free access to data under a restrictive license - is pretty close to shooting yourself in the foot.
#3
az
on
2006-11-26 18:06
I could not agree more with the comments above.
I find it pretty strange, that there seems to be sort of lust in the Free Software Scene on becoming betrayed. So, if a company does not do this for years, every subtle hint must be interpreted as a sign. Google cannot afford to offend a big number of FS-developers, because they are just depending on this kind of software. So, calm down.
I find it pretty strange, that there seems to be sort of lust in the Free Software Scene on becoming betrayed. So, if a company does not do this for years, every subtle hint must be interpreted as a sign. Google cannot afford to offend a big number of FS-developers, because they are just depending on this kind of software. So, calm down.
C.M. is right. Google does not own the copyright to Google Earth data. Instead, they license the data from Navteq and other companies. The terms of their contract with Navteq prohibit Google from sub-licensing the data to any other organization (otherwise, Google would be undercutting Navteq's business).
Now, reverse-engineering the Google Earth protocol is probably legal (as long as you only use the man-in-the middle attack, like was done to write Samba). The problem is, you cannot use the reverse engineered protocol to *connect to Google Earth servers*. If Google knows that Gaia is downloading Google Eath data, a judge will probably interpret this as de facto sub-licensing. Navteq will sue Google for breach of contract, and will win. And there will be no more Google Earth or satellite view in Google Maps.
The solution is very simple. Gaia needs to get a permission from NASA or Navteq or some other provider of satellite images. Until Google starts launching its own satellites, it can't help Gaia.
Now, reverse-engineering the Google Earth protocol is probably legal (as long as you only use the man-in-the middle attack, like was done to write Samba). The problem is, you cannot use the reverse engineered protocol to *connect to Google Earth servers*. If Google knows that Gaia is downloading Google Eath data, a judge will probably interpret this as de facto sub-licensing. Navteq will sue Google for breach of contract, and will win. And there will be no more Google Earth or satellite view in Google Maps.
The solution is very simple. Gaia needs to get a permission from NASA or Navteq or some other provider of satellite images. Until Google starts launching its own satellites, it can't help Gaia.
can you put a link to gaia-0.1.0.win32-patch.tar.bz2? I would like to test it in windows at least...
#6
tom
on
2006-11-28 13:39
Its a shame that this project was cancelled.
While I do agree with the fact that since Google pays a lot for those images and they are strictly licensed which means that they can't afford to let this kind of thing continue, I do wish that there were alternatives to their proprietary program.
I'd also like to request copies of gaia-0.1.0.win32-patch.tar.bz2 and gaia-0.1.0.zip so I can use this on Windows.
While I do agree with the fact that since Google pays a lot for those images and they are strictly licensed which means that they can't afford to let this kind of thing continue, I do wish that there were alternatives to their proprietary program.
I'd also like to request copies of gaia-0.1.0.win32-patch.tar.bz2 and gaia-0.1.0.zip so I can use this on Windows.
#7
David
on
2006-11-29 03:52
Add Comment