Adding routes to areas on MtnPrjct using a Guidebook.

MacM wrote:Haha alright then. Cool Beans. So basically, every time I go to an area just make sure I'm ready for "a possible epic" up a 50' route I don't have any information on. Unless, of course, I carry my super-heavy guidebook with me (Sarcasm). In Central AZ/Phoenix/Prescott, a majority of these routes were put up in late 70's. I climbed a route the other day that was rated at 5.5, however many people would rate it a 5.9 for sure. Also the second belay was a single glued Piton, probably put in on the FA 30+ years ago. The guidebook states this minor detail, therefore I had the right equip. to improvise this belay. I would like to have that knowledge going into some of the routes I do, and having that knowledge at my finger-tips is priceless sometimes. As Brian S. stated, that's pretty much what I was getting at. Why did I pay for something that ends up not providing me with the service I need? And since I have the ability to close the gap between having total information and partial, I choose the latter and would like to still add it. What I am thinking of doing, which was a thought to begin with. If I put the info on MP then climb the route, and then later change the route information/description based on my own experience. This would be better, no? Thank you guys for clearing this up, I understand that MP is "Beyond the Guidebook" and that IS what makes MP, well MP. -Mac Oh, Mike Lane's comment is hilarious. Unfortunately not correct, for the record I have already ponied up the 26.18$ for the AZ Guidebook. Several years ago.

So my question is: Why bother asking?

OP: Would it be okay to do something that is illegal and morally wrong?

30 some odd responses: NO!

OP: Ok, I'll go ahead and do it anyway...

So, MacM has added 27 routes to MP. He's ticked off only 2. And, a few of them are a full number grade above his claimed ability. There don't appear to be pictures for any of them.

Maybe he's just not ticking off everything he climbs. And, maybe he just isn't that worried about the ability level listed on MP. Or, maybe he's already adding them from the guide book.

I wonder how his descriptions compare to those in the guide book???

Crag Dweller wrote:So, MacM has added 27 routes to MP. He's ticked off only 2. And, a few of them are a full number grade above his claimed ability.

Fair enough, but I wouldn't put much stock in ticklists and claimed ability levels. I, for one, don't use the MP ticklist and I think my claimed grade in there is like 5.0, A0, WI0 etc.

Every route I've entered, I have at a minimum climbed on the route and done all the moves. There are plenty that I did not go back and redpoint, there are boulder problems I did not send, there are routes I followed rather than led. I write my own descriptions and the only thing I'd consult a guidebook for is the FA info.

But this all seems like common sense, doesn't it? I guess some folks really like techno gadgets, personally I prefer a photocopy of the guidebook page(s)...battery never dies in a piece of paper, and I can fold it in half, stick it in my pocket, can't break it, and can wipe my ass with it if need be.

Will S wrote: Fair enough, but I wouldn't put much stock in ticklists and claimed ability levels. I, for one, don't use the MP ticklist and I think my claimed grade in there is like 5.0, A0, WI0 etc.

Yeah, I know. I don't. Hence, the 'maybes' that followed. But, you have to admit it's a bit suspicious in this instance.

jack s. wrote: So my question is: Why bother asking? OP: Would it be okay to do something that is illegal and morally wrong? 30 some odd responses: NO! OP: Ok, I'll go ahead and do it anyway...

To be clear, reposting information about a climb from a guidebook is not illegal. There is no copyright infringement if you read in an encyclopedia that Mt. Everest is 8848m tall and then post the same information elsewhere. Likewise, there is no copyright infringement if you read in a guidebook that Geisha is a 95 foot tall sport climb with 11 bolts and rated 5.8, and then post that information on Mountain Project.

Again, I'm not commenting on the morality of the practice, and I'm not commenting on whether it is otherwise prudent, but it is NOT illegal. Trust me.

Brandon J. Owens wrote: To be clear, reposting information about a climb from a guidebook is not illegal. There is no copyright infringement if you read in an encyclopedia that Mt. Everest is 8848m tall and then post the same information elsewhere. Likewise, there is no copyright infringement if you read in a guidebook that Geisha is a 95 foot tall sport climb with 11 bolts and rated 5.8, and then post that information on Mountain Project. Again, I'm not commenting on the morality of the practice, and I'm not commenting on whether it is otherwise prudent, but it is NOT illegal. Trust me.

What experience do you have in this? Why should we trust you?

Often times, the reason that information can be republished w/o violating a copyright law is that the information is publicly available through other sources. For instance, it wouldn't be too hard to find the height of Everest published by a source that has not copyrighted the information. Thus, the encyclopedia can not enforce its copyright law on that information.

It's worth noting that MP has a clause in its T&Cs to protect itself against copyright infringement by its users:

7. Reporting Content Violations
If you believe that any Content on Mountain Project violates your copyright you can report such violation using the Contact Us link on every page on Mountain Project. It is often difficult to determine if your intellectual property rights have been violated. We may request additional information before we remove any infringing material. If a dispute develops as to the correct owner of the rights in question, we reserve the right to remove your content along with that of the alleged infringer pending resolution of the matter.

Brandon J. Owens wrote: To be clear, reposting information about a climb from a guidebook is not illegal. There is no copyright infringement if you read in an encyclopedia that Mt. Everest is 8848m tall and then post the same information elsewhere. Likewise, there is no copyright infringement if you read in a guidebook that Geisha is a 95 foot tall sport climb with 11 bolts and rated 5.8, and then post that information on Mountain Project. Again, I'm not commenting on the morality of the practice, and I'm not commenting on whether it is otherwise prudent, but it is NOT illegal. Trust me.

I mostly agree with you there; however, if this guidebook has anything other than statistics in the description, it could be illegal if not cited. Anyway, I was referring to the OP's statement that he was aware that this is copyright infringement. I was not making my own assessment of the legality.

I am not familiar with the guidebook in question, so I don't know what info it has on each route. Keep in mind though that ratings are not really statistics since they can't be measured. They are subjective according to the guidebook author.

Crag Dweller wrote: What experience do you have in this? Why should we trust you? Often times, the reason that information can be republished w/o violating a copyright law is that the information is publicly available through other sources. For instance, it wouldn't be too hard to find the height of Everest published by a source that has not copyrighted the information. Thus, the encyclopedia can not enforce its copyright law on that information. It's worth noting that MP has a clause in its T&Cs to protect itself against copyright infringement by its users: 7. Reporting Content Violations If you believe that any Content on Mountain Project violates your copyright you can report such violation using the Contact Us link on every page on Mountain Project. It is often difficult to determine if your intellectual property rights have been violated. We may request additional information before we remove any infringing material. If a dispute develops as to the correct owner of the rights in question, we reserve the right to remove your content along with that of the alleged infringer pending resolution of the matter.

U.S. Copyright Law: copyright.gov/title17/92cha…

Copyright protection extends to original works of authorship. Creative expression is necessary for a work to be one of original authorship. Underlying facts, concepts, ideas, etc, are not protected by the copyright law; only the particular original expression of them.

Also, even if someone copied a climb's description from a guidebook verbatim and placed it on Mountain Project, they would probably have a strong Fair Use Doctrine defense to copyright infringement.

You should trust me because I'm a lawyer and, although no expert on the subject, I've studied intellectual property law enough to know that pulling facts from a guidebook is not copyright infringement.

Edit: This forum is an inappropriate place for a more in depth analysis/explanation of why this would most likely not constitute copyright infringement. The purpose of my post is so that you can continue to discuss whether the OP's question is ethically acceptable and/or a good idea, and not be distracted by the "it's illegal!" argument. It is not illegal, moving on.

Brandon J. Owens wrote: U.S. Copyright Law: copyright.gov/title17/92cha… Copyright protection extends to original works of authorship. Creative expression is necessary for a work to be one of original authorship. Underlying facts, concepts, ideas, etc, are not protected by the copyright law; only the particular original expression of them. Also, even if someone copied a climb's description from a guidebook verbatim and placed it on Mountain Project, they would probably have a strong Fair Use Doctrine defense to copyright infringement. You should trust me because I'm a lawyer and, although no expert on the subject, I've studied intellectual property law enough to know that pulling facts from a guidebook is not copyright infringement.

Fair enough. How about route descriptions? Seems to me one could argue route descriptions involve creative expression.

Crag Dweller wrote: Fair enough. How about route descriptions? Seems to me one could argue route descriptions involve creative expression.

Yes, it's true that when a person starts including things like route descriptions they are entering the realm of copyright. I may have nodded to this in my last post. That said, given the nature of Mountainproject.com, a person would likely still be able to use the defense of the fair use doctrine.

To be clear, none of this is legal advice; I'm simply speaking generally about whether copying information from a guidebook onto mountain project would constitute copyright infringement. Generally speaking, it would not.

Edit: I think that this is a very interesting topic and I would like to see the debate about what is acceptable by the community hashed out some more.

Given that we can all move past the question of legality at this point, my personal opinion is thus: If a guidebook already exists for a climbing area, and MountainProject already has the area listed, then it behooves everyone who is a member of the MountainProject community to have a complete list of the climbs in that area, lest they miss out on a potentially fun climb. Furthermore, I can't see how it hurts for someone to post the height, grade, location, and protection of a climb, even if they have not sent it. That said, I think someone should have at least seen and attempted a climb before posting information about which they have no clue as to accuracy.

Wow, thank you guys for your input. I seriously wasn't expecting this to turn into what it has. There are a lot of valid points bringing brought up on this, and I'm glad people are chiming in to say them.

Couple things I would like to clear up a bit:

- Crag Dweller finally mentioned I put up 27 routes, 25 of these I put up on MP out of the AZ Guidebook. One of the first routes I added that had a description verbatim to said Guidebook actually received a comment from Luke W. "Sounds a lot like Green's description..." (Stewart M. Green is the Author of the Guidebook for AZ, where I copied the info from). That comment is what mostly sparked this conversation. I then stopped updating the area after that comment.

- Going along with DrApnea and Brandon Owens, my goal is to "fill in the gaps" for this specific area, which is 10 mins from my residence so I will be climbing at this crag a lot. I have just taken pics to extensively document this area to go along with the descriptions from the Guidebook, I haven't gotten around to quite posting them yet.

- Only within this year have I started using the "Tick" feature on MP, and I really couldn't care less about keeping my ability ratings up to date. They change with the seasons..sometimes I can climb ~2 grades higher, other times ~2 grades lower..

- I do carry photocopies around of routes...that I get off MP.com, sometimes in supplement to my Guidebook. I do recommend this when doing only specific routes at an area btw.

- Brandon Owens, I really appreciate what you've contributed to this discussion. I'm stoked you decided to throw that information our way for this.

I honestly still do plan on using the guidebook as reference to put the rest of the routes for that single area on MP. I will probably climb all those routes within the next 6 mo. and will update all of them accordingly. Beta pics should be up within the next week. I plan on giving this area what is deserves, to be noticed as a premier climbing location in Prescott and AZ.

Thanks again everyone!
-Mac, PPG

Are you serious? A real discussion on MP, and information was discovered? GTFOOH. Sorry I didn't spice it up a bit. Next time.

I think it should still feel wrong to add a route to MP only after you were able to climb it with beta from a guidebook. The guidebook got you up the climb. Just b/c you climbed a route doesn't mean you can spray guidebook beta online.

This kid's a punk!

caughtinside wrote:ok to reference, but a wholesale copying of guidebook info not ok.

Also: If you don't see your local crag's guidebook listed on Mountain Project, ask the MP area admin to add it.

Matt N wrote:I think it should still feel wrong to add a route to MP only after you were able to climb it with beta from a guidebook. The guidebook got you up the climb. Just b/c you climbed a route doesn't mean you can spray guidebook beta online.

Not sure I understand your point.

Why is it wrong?

Guidebook gets you to the route, gives you the location, the name, maybe the FA information. Unless you get beta word of mouth...

Actually think because you climbed a route does mean you can spray beta online, which, would normally include information from a guidebook like who did the FA. Also, sometimes I don't remember details well enough, and, will consult a guidebook just to shore up a description I'm hazy on (or to at least reference routes nearby that I didn't do, for location).

Guidebooks are sometimes wrong, too, and a data base such as here can help correct a guidebook, or, really augment a description, rack information, difficulty, etc. The consensus grading is fairly useful for especially popular routes. Also, knowing what some people, who's opinion I more or less trust, grade a particular route helps me decide if its within my range, or, is something I should find a stronger partner for. Etc.

Brandon J. Owens wrote: Yes, it's true that when a person starts including things like route descriptions they are entering the realm of copyright.

Interesting, but...

I think some folks have successfully argued that route names themselves are copyrighted. Were'nt the folks very protective of some of the Baja climbing able to shut down a guidebook for that area? Maybe copyright law is different down south...hmmm...

Brian in SLC wrote: Interesting, but... I think some folks have successfully argued that route names themselves are copyrighted. Were'nt the folks very protective of some of the Baja climbing able to shut down a guidebook for that area? Maybe copyright law is different down south...hmmm...

IF the name were protectable by copyright (this is not the case), then it would be because someone named a route, not because the route name was subsequently published in a guidebook. Hence, any unauthorized use of the route name in print, even in the guidebook itself, would be a potential violation of the copyright. Again, however, this is not the case.

Copyright law does NOT protect names.

Also, copyright law is federal, and therefore uniform across the states.

Seth Derr wrote:Or just take a picture of the desired route with your cell phone, if indeed you have that capability.

Yes! Or, if, like me, you carry a point and shoot on long routes, take a photo of the topo of your climb before you head out. Very convenient...

Will S wrote:Yep. Like compulsively altering your MP avatar pic to be some hot thang that you'll never get within a mile of. And no, I don't have or use an iPhone.

I have to weigh in here. I look forward almost daily to Killis' latest avatar. He had a really good Cindy Crawford thing going for a while there. Old skool. Props.

I don't know what the legal issues for route descriptions boil down to. Some routes or pitches can be really hard to describe in a useful way, and a successful description requires that the writer both climb the pitch and then struggle to describe it. The law may or may not protect such efforts, but the climbing community sure as hell ought to, considering the labor of love done in their favor.

On the other hand, a description that says ``follow the prominent crack and dihedral system 1200 feet to the top'' doesn't seem to have much in it that could be viewed as an invaluable and unique result of the author's work.

However, to reiterate a point made earlier, most people who have climbed a route and then post descriptions are benefiting from the work of a guidebook author, and would not have been posting at all without the aid of that work. Because of this I suggest that ANYONE POSTING A ROUTE SHOULD CREDIT EXPLICITLY THE GUIDEBOOK THEY USED TO DO THE ROUTE. This is the absolute least we can do as a community to support the guidebook authors.

Finally, I'd like to join the chorus suggesting that copying a guidebook route onto MP just so it can be viewed on a cell phone is totally bogus. As has been mentioned, you can take a photo of the guidebook pages directly with your cell phone---I suggest using a scanner app (there a good free ones). Personally, I have used Brian's method of photographing some pages with the point-and-shoot I'm going to be carrying anyway, which works even if you aren't going to carry a cell-phone on your climb.