

If Google had a gun… (or – shoot your developers first, ask questions later) - codeinvain
http://pingjam.com/if-google-had-a-gun-or-shoot-your-developers-first-ask-questions-later/

======
rcfox
"He told him that we could not share any non-public 3rd party contact
information without the explicit consent of that 3rd party.  Although this is
much stricter than the strictest legal opinions we had – we had no choice but
to abide." 

So you reluctantly stopped stealing people's data?  It's hard to have sympathy
when you're complaining about Google protecting people's privacy! 

~~~
codeinvain
No stealing what so ever ,see Elnor's response :
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4175896> . 

------
jnorthrop
"He told him that we could not share any non-public 3rd party contact
information without the explicit consent of that 3rd party." 

The European Data Directive, which Google is subject to, does prohibit this
practice.  Enforcement on this in the EU is sketchy but Google is already under
the microscope in the EU for many other practices. 

And their revision of only pulling from public sources isn't quite that clear. 
If they are aggregating that data then it could be considered transforming
pseudo-anonymous data to something that is personally identifiable -- or at
least the risk of that. 

I don't agree with these laws and regulations and I can sympathize with the
company but Google is really just protecting themselves. 

~~~
codeinvain
yes but at what cost? ,  wouldn't it be better that google will have some sort
of approval process like in the apple store.  at least there you know where you
stand. 

------
hendrik-xdest
I don't think that a publicly available database means that you can use their
data without consent.  In Germany any collection of data might fall under the
protection of copyright (or you could even patent a data collection, if I am
not mistaken).  Telephone books, for example, are free for anyone.  But you
can't go ahead and scan the pages and provide a service that parses through
the data. 

My guess is that the sources you use might be free to use but not necessarily
free to integrate into a software product.  Even if there are APIs available I
would check your sources to see if there are special rules for commercial
products or applications that access the data massively. 

~~~
rcfox
In Canada, raw data (such as telephone book listings) are not
copyrightable[0].  The graphics and layout of the phone book pages are, but the
data is not. 

[0] <http://www.lmlaw.ca/copyright_raw_data.pdf>

~~~
hendrik-xdest
I remember a German or European court ruling that states that as soon as a
measurable effort is needed to collect the data it might be protected by
copyright--could even be the effort to create a management or collection
software.  At least, I think that was the case but I might be mistaken.  Also, I
do not remember what kind of data collection this related to in the first
place. 

~~~
antidoh
Does that then mean that only the first collector is allowed to collect, even
if subsequent collections are independent efforts? 

------
brd
Looking at this from Google's perspective I can't really blame them for what
they're doing although its unfortunate they aren't being more forthcoming with
you.  Your app, while a great idea, has serious privacy ramifications and
Google will receive a lot of the backlash if its covered by mainstream media
in an unfavorable light. 

~~~
codeinvain
on the other hand , google play approved white pages app which reveals not
only your name but also your physical address. 

further more to remove yourself from white pages listing you need to pay a
monthly fee. 

------
chiph
Welcome to working with large corporations.  Not only does the left hand not
know what the right hand is doing, the fingers are pretty much in the dark,
too. 

~~~
elnorr
Thanks for the comments and don't get us wrong, we fully agree that everyone's
privacy should be respected.  This is why we started this endeavor by
consulting a crack team of lawyers and by surveying a lot of users to
understand where the line is drawn by both.  We went for the less invasive
option, and when all was said and done - almost all we did that exposed any
3rd party details was to show you the name of the person that is calling you. 
After all, if they are calling you they either want to share their name with
you anyway or they are shady to begin with.  Again no problem with having clear
directions and following them.  Huge problem with arbitrary, terminal decisions
that come without dialogue or an opportunity to understand what is deemed
wrong. 

------
codeinvain
This is a second post (of many more it seems...) in the saga of pingjam's play
(store) adventures.  In the past month we have been working our asses off
because of google's store random bans and lack of communication. 

Since Google is blatantly ignoring us - we would appreciate any comments and
experience you have and are happy to share ours as well . 

~~~
asto
You should consider caching your post before putting it here.  Google doesn't
seem to have a cached version either and I'm unable to read your post because
your site is down. 

~~~
Cyranix
Cached version has finally come through:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://pingjam.com/if-
google-had-a-gun-or-shoot-your-developers-first-ask-questions-later/)

