Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:49 pm Post subject: our database
after reading all the posts on this matter,the fors and againsts,re charging for speed cams,old and new members getting upset,coptright arguments,members wanting payment for speed cams sent to you for free,slagging of people who have run the site for years,the list goes on and on and on..this sort of behaviour only leaves a bad tatse in everyones mouth..it seems to me that its not the cost you are going to charge..be it a penny or a pound,its the fact that it was always stated that the database would be free.so in this spirit,members gave you the information that made the database what it is today..for free..you may notice i said the database,not your database,as i feel the database is ours,the members that is..seems only right and fair to me as we did give all the infomation to compile it..so its now down to a matter of principle,not cost..good luck in whatever you decide but sadly i feel the curtain is about to fall..regards abbott
Joined: Jul 21, 2004 Posts: 2718 Location: Chelmsford, UK
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:56 pm Post subject:
Quote:
The fact is that a voluntarily updated database is open to abuse. How many traffic police officers or council revenue personnel submit deletions to the database in order to have cameras removed from the database? How would you know if they were doing this? While the database is free, all users are (or should be) aware that the information may not be entirely accurate.
Alas, this is indeed the case with a purely voluntary operation. As we have said, we ALSO intend to employ professional physical checking services to collate the data. This way the abuse will be minimised.
Quote:
If as you state, that you will physically check the locations, how do you expect to do that.
I worked for many years in the market research industry and know of many research companies (not sure why this job traditionally falls within their remit) who already check outdoor sites - not cameras - and report on existing and new (usually competitors) sites. Think 10's of thousands of outdoor advertising posters, most checked weekly, others monthly.
Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 19991 Location: West and Southwest London
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:01 pm Post subject:
My second twopennyworth....
In the past Richard (Oldie) has emailed me personally to ask if I could check the details for a couple of cameras which have had conflicting reports sent in, and I have gone out of my way (literally!) to drive past them and report back.
I even stopped and photographed one which someone was insisting didn't exist for some reason, and presumably I'm not the only one he's asked this favour of...
Not only was I happy to do this, but felt quite chuffed that I was "part of the team".
But do PocketGPSWorld think I will feel as keen to make the effort from now on?
You guessed it...
Secondly, this suggestion that everyone re-submits EVERY camera, (if it comes off) is surely just going to cause an avalanche of extra work, in the middle of which actual NEW cameras may well get lost.
Who is going to sort out which of 20 re-submissions, all in slightly different places, is actually the correct one?
Also, I have put in quite a lot of effort working out where to re-position entries so they trigger correctly with the TomTom's "warn only when on route" feature. I will be very peeved if all this is lost because someone has been a bit late pressing his capture button, but submitted it anyway.
Finally, isn't it rather odd that an announcement of this change was not even posted in the safety camera forum itself? (and the first comment about it was immediately locked!)
In this case ALL the third party data contributed to the database is protected by copyright.
This is just not true. For something to be copyright it has to be a unique creation in some way. Just reporting something that already exists does not create a copyright. The "data" that is the camera's position was created by whoever first put an "x" on the map to send the camera installers out. Yes, compiling data into a particular form may be copyright, but think about maps. It isn't the existence of a road or railway that is copyright, it is the fact that you present it in a certain way and with certain symbols and colours that creates the copyright. Interesting fact - if you take a photograph of a work of art that is exhibited in a public place, then you own the copyright of the photo and can protect it by law, but the creator of the work of art has no copyrights whatsoever. - from government website:- "Any copyright in a building, or a sculpture which is permanently situated in a public place or premises open to the public, is not infringed by taking a photograph of it or subsequent use of the photograph. (Section 62 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988)."
Joined: Jun 20, 2005 Posts: 1096 Location: Solihull, UK
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:22 pm Post subject:
I submitted some updates to camera positions at the weekend (M5 roadworks, nr Bristol). I supplied this information Free of Charge. Had I realised at the time that PGPSW would be charging for other members of the community to use this information, I would not have submitted it.
I will now withdraw my permission for this data to be redistributed in any format that requires individuals to make a payment for it.
Joined: Jun 16, 2004 Posts: 454 Location: London, Ingerlund
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:27 pm Post subject:
I must say I'm shocked at the attitude of many many posters regarding this.
For some time you've had free forum access, free reviews, free advice and a free camera database. All of these take up many unpaid hours of many peoples time. They give this up selflessly to help others. Oldie in particular spends much of his life doing this database. To pay for one of these services is completely fair.
To charge £2 per month for this is not unreasonable. It is infact very reasonable given all the work that goes into it. For those who complain saying that it is their work in recording POI's that made it possible - how long does it take to push a button to record a POI? A second? Two seconds? Compare this with the time taken to sort, organise and prepart and distribute the database. It's not in the same league.
One or two people have mentioned that they have gone out of their way to verify cameras. This shouldn't need to be done anymore if there is a salaried person on board. But even if I were asked to check a camera I would still do it, as it will benefit the PocketGPS community.
Everybody expects everything for nothing these days and the idea of paying for something seems alien.
As for the "copyright" issue, simply put a disclaimer on the site and on the POICapture software stating that any contributors will have their submissions used in the database and that is a condition of use. To be honest, I can't believe some people were petty and small-minded enough to even bring it up. Shame on you. It is not being used for "commercial gain". It is being used to provide a reasonably-priced service to members. It is paying the salary of a dedicated person. It is not making the founders rich!
PocketGPSWorld may have started off as a "hobbyist" site, but is now looked upon across the industry for it's knowledge. It is becoming "professional" whether they like it or not. It has been featured on national television and it's founders are now well known and respected in the GPS industry. Things aren't the same as they were a couple of years ago and users will have to accept that.
STOP WHINGING, STOP COMPLAINING. £2 per month is a whole £24 per year. Well worth the cost. And stop arguing over whether it should be £20 per year. For Gods's sake, you're arguing over £4!!! You can't even buy a packet of fags for that!
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15142 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:29 pm Post subject:
slightly off topic, but still relevent.
i regularly submitted data to the CDDB via a program called music collector. this data was freely available (i.e. track names from cd's etc). however, CDDB changed their licensing for music collector (MuC) so MuC stopped using CDDB and started using the FreeDB instead. however, due to copyright restrictions we could not use any CDDB data for submitting to the FreeDB - well, it was my data that i submitted so why not? basically, by submitting your data you were saying 'here you go, you can have it'. at the time it was submitted users never said 'by the way, this is mine'
unfortunately these things happen! it's publicly available data (anyone can get co-ords for a fixed point on a street) so very hard to prove ownership.
Uhm, someone has finally hit the point that has been runninground the grey matter since reading the entire thread.
If everybody re-submits these entries can you imagine the enormous workload that will create. Isn't this part of the problem in the first place- the demands of time and physical effort involved.
As for fencing it out to a third party, this crossed my mind too, but as an old user of this forum, i, as i am sure, we all know how touchy Pocketgpsworld are towards Their property, so surely it must mean THEIR database.
Anyway if you had nurtured a cash cow to the point of harvest read that payola day wouldn't you want to be the sucker who milks it.
Joined: Nov 22, 2004 Posts: 137 Location: Somerset, UK
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:44 pm Post subject:
I'm very dissapointed at the news that the free speed camera database is to go commercial as a chargable download.
There are companies such as TomTom who have to make a living from their products, and undercutting their prices seems unfair, given that the database has largely been generated and verified by people contributing to a free 'community' database, which effectively is now being sold as a commercial product.
I have donated money to support the site willingly, but would not pay for a download, as my feeling is that the database will be less accurate as a result of charging (a higher price for quite probably a worse product).
If the justification for charging is to employ one full time employee to verify camera locations throughout the UK this is clearly not going to work - and the hundreds of volunteer hours this will most likely lose will clearly have been doing a better job than one person will have the time to.
Given the recent news that the goverment will be restricting or blocking new camera sites, reducing the value of monthly updates, it seems a bad time to announce the camera database will now become chargable monthly service.
I also wonder how much this will hit the number of site visitors, which I assume will impact advertising revenue.
The history of the internet is littered with fantastic free websites and communities just like this one, which got greedy and thought they could charge for the service, and fell flat on their face ! I hope this won't go the same way !
Joined: 19/08/2002 15:39:36 Posts: 172 Location: United Kingdom
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:47 pm Post subject:
MaFt wrote:
unfortunately these things happen! it's publicly available data (anyone can get co-ords for a fixed point on a street) so very hard to prove ownership.
MaFt
So how can Pocketgps sell something that they can't prove they own??.
had a thought...
as this site's members/moderators provide invaluable support/advice/information to owners of gps equipment/software, therefore eleviating the need for the manufacturer/developers to employ more support staff, could you not approach them for contributions ?
AND, as mentioned in an earlier post, what about the GPS retailers that advertise equipment with the safety camera database as an insentive/free extra ?
I expect it will be free anyway, regardless whether you charge, because people will offer it via P2P or torrent
beginning to wish I hadn't sent in that update on Sunday, but will be holding on to the new updates I have until this is resolved _________________ SW
Oh Dear after reading all 13 pages of posts, you really have open a can of worms.
I'd re-think this one if I were you.
I for one won't be paying for the download, because you havn't consulted the share-holders (us) and I'd love to see how many more people won't be paying, lets have a poll, or are you too scared to see what results will be.
I may change my mind though if you provide compelling evidence, ie numbers of people who will pay against those who won't,
OR
offer a written guarantee that people get thier money back if cameras are in the wrong place or show the wrong type, speed etc.
Did you think up charging for the database in the Pub!!! after several drinks!!!
Free should remain Free _________________ Asus A620, Holux GM 210 TTN v5.21 v6 Maps
CheckPoint 5
Joined: Nov 01, 2005 Posts: 29 Location: Republic of Yorkshire
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:58 pm Post subject:
Bigstoo wrote:
A couple of basic questions that would soon put an end to all doubts which way you could go:
POLL1
Would you be willing in principle to pay for the saftey camera database from PGPSW? YES / NO
POLL2
If charging was applied would you continue to contribute updates to PGPSW? YES / NO
If after the polls you have enough YES's to cover your costs, there is your answer. If you have a large % of NO's, then that tells you how it will be im afraid.
There have been several posts asking for a poll, one even created a poll, but was a bit limited to the data it was collecting. Once and for all why doesnt PGPSW create a poll with these two basic questions??
It seems obvious to me. If most are No, then you have no site and no product to offer. If most are Yes, then youre on to a winner. simple.
A couple of basic questions that would soon put an end to all doubts which way you could go:
POLL1
Would you be willing in principle to pay for the saftey camera database from PGPSW? YES / NO
POLL2
If charging was applied would you continue to contribute updates to PGPSW? YES / NO
If after the polls you have enough YES's to cover your costs, there is your answer. If you have a large % of NO's, then that tells you how it will be im afraid.
I will create these Polls as they appear to be desired ... URLs to follow
Rich
There have been several posts asking for a poll, one even created a poll, but was a bit limited to the data it was collecting. Once and for all why doesnt PGPSW create a poll with these two basic questions??
It seems obvious to me. If most are No, then you have no site and no product to offer. If most are Yes, then youre on to a winner. simple.
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
