Floor plan with linked images

[Mountain Goat]

To me, this looks like a derivation based on an original work by Brooke

This is where you are wrong. It is not.

Brooke's version is a fairly sophisticated use of javascript.

Annette's version is a simple hotspot link to an image.

Try it out.

A mistake by you, and you ought to apologise to everyone concerned.

MG

[A-two]

MG,
In September 2007, Brooke started working with her architect father on implementing her floor plan tour that she had always talked about since before you were even a member here. After she published her tutorial, Brooke herself suggested it could be simplified. It would be disingenuous for anyone to take that idea, adapt it, then take sole credit for it, as if the original work had nothing to do with the solution derived from that original work. You are not denying that you got the inspiration to do the floor plan tour from Brooke, and that you looked at it closely before deciding on a simplified solution, so I don't understand why you didn't think to ask her if she had any objections to your helping someone else turn it into a commercial business before you started promoting it as such.

Anyway, I really don't care to spend any more time on LMH right now, there's obviously nothing in it for me when I try to stand up for what I think is right, except a character assassination, and I don't enjoy that.

[Mountain Goat]

A2
There are dozens of solutions to web-based floor plans, many of which incorporate hot-spots to panoramas, pop-up images, videos etc. Take a look here, and in particular to Tourweaver.

Yes, I looked at Brooke's, I think it is great. However, it wouldn't have crossed my mind to ask her permission to find another solution or help someone turn hot-spots on floor plans into a business. It wasn't an original idea; it already existed.

No-one's assassinating your character, you're a respected and a valued member of the forum - just perhaps don't jump to batty assumptions that hurt other members - I didn't enjoy it either.

Another plea for a member not to leave - is it the weather?

MG

[Giddy Goat]

I agree MG - Joanna, please please please, stick around. This is crazy!

[Rocket Rab]

Have any of you who have benefited from this offered Brooke anything for her part in it? Don't you think you should?

No, I haven't, but if Brooke tells me there is good reason to pay her a cut on the plans delivered by Annette, I shall be happy to do so.

Floor plans have been on my wish list for a long time. Annette delivers what her customers want: plans, with photos, at an affordable price. Thanks, MG, for bringing this service to the attention of LMH members.

Is it the weather?

A few cases of sunstroke, you mean? I have just returned from a week's holiday, and several current threads on this forum make truly eye-popping reading.

[Mountain Goat]

Gloomy and pouring with rain in South Eastern Blighty.....

Was that you on your windsurfer, Rab, scooting around (plus the jet-ski)? Google Earth can be really useful......

MG

[Rocket Rab]

Shhhhh! I'm conscious my loutish leisure activities might raise a few eyebrows....

[vrooje]

To me, this looks like a derivation based on an original work by Brooke

This is where you are wrong. It is not.

Well, yes and no.

Brooke's version is a fairly sophisticated use of javascript.

Not really. It's more sophisticated than plain HTML, but it's not advanced coding. And A-two is right; it could be simplified even further if the arrows/cameras on the floor plan didn't have to change color.

Annette's version is a simple hotspot link to an image.

That is definitely not true. Based on your floor plans, it appears that Annette's pages are coded so that the HTML looks like a simple image link. But, in fact, there is plenty of Javascript at work. The code is all contained in two separate files, referenced by two script tags at the top of the page.

Annette's code is not really a derivation of mine -- if it is related at all, it is an evolution from brute-force functional to more sophisticated and professional.

So in that sense there is no issue of copyright violation here, since Annette's code is sufficiently different that I could never legitimately claim it was "copied."

For the record, that solution I created is free for any owner to use for their property, but no, I didn't mean for it to be commercially used. It didn't occur to me to mention it because most people who would think to make money from coding a clickable floor plan would likely be able to code it themselves, probably more elegantly than me (e.g., someone like Annette).

Still, I am very flattered by the way A-two and others stood up for my interests. Thank you!

Finally, let me say that I have no problem with the end result, which I think offers benefits for many people, but I seek clarification on the manner in which resources of LMH have been used in this instance, and continue to be used.

I still think A-two has a legitimate point here. Eight of Annette's 15 posts (to date) are about floor plans, and this thread does seem to have been asking for advice about improving the overall commercial product rather than more effectively promoting Annette's specific apartment.

We don't currently have a forum rule stating that freely offered advice shouldn't be used by others for commercial purposes. Should we?

[Jimbo]

Vrooje wrote:

there is no issue of copyright violation here, since Annette's code is sufficiently different that I could never legitimately claim it was "copied."

Brooke's generous response is a welcome burst of sanity and restraint after all the mud-slinging. The real issue here was copyright abuse - or not - of Brooke's plans. If Brooke says 'no abuse', all the rest is flim-flam and there seems no reason for A2 to depart.

... that solution I created is free for any owner to use for their property, but no, I didn't mean for it to be commercially used. We don't currently have a forum rule stating that freely offered advice shouldn't be used by others for commercial purposes. Should we?

In a Beatrix Potter world, it would be possible to place restrictions on plans, photographs and text published on LMH and rely on Jemima and Jeremy to abide by the rules. Unfortunately, we're on an open internet forum and, even if members can be trusted to behave honourably, there are thousands of lurkers and casual passers-by who will happily help themselves without a qualm to your altruistically-published work. The brutal answer is: if you don't want something to be stolen, don't publish it here. We'll all be the poorer but, as in society at large, the bad guys make the running.

For me, there's an irony that A2 and MG have come to blows over an issue of possible abuse of legal and moral rights to published work. Only recently, on another thread, they combined to pour derision on my polite request that details of software allowing images to be downloaded from websites not be made available on this open forum but rather through PMs to interested members. As the software is legal, I was accused of 'attempting to censor a valid discussion'. That the same software could be used for illegal purposes was ignored.

Jim

[Rocket Rab]

Brooke's generous response is a welcome burst of sanity and restraint after all the mud-slinging. The real issue here was copyright abuse - or not - of Brooke's plans. If Brooke says 'no abuse', all the rest is flim-flam.....

A-two

You've 100% got the wrong end of the stick, and my heart sinks at another stupid LMH wrangle.

Before you blazed away with this tosh, why on earth didn't you get your facts correct, or do you enjoy this stuff?

I'm so tempted to ignore it, but since you're making me out to be dishonest and underhand, you'll get your reply, in full.

Not quite "flim-flam", perhaps, Jim. As I read them, Joanna's comments were a virulent and hurtful attack on MG (and, by extension, on Annette and users of her service, myself included). In the circumstances, I would also want to offer a robust defence. Hardly "mud-slinging".

[Jimbo]

In the circumstances, I would also want to offer a robust defence. Hardly "mud-slinging".

Maybe so, RR, and if Annette and MG are indeed innocent bystanders, I offer my apologies. Perhaps it's easier for some members on the inside track to make sense of these sudden and vicious accusations and counter-accusations but, for many of us, it's more difficult to separate fact from fiction. Or maybe I'm just dim.

To me, the central point was whether Brooke's copyright had been breached. The rest of the inflammatory discussions might have been more usefully done 'off-piste' by the protagonists and, when a conclusion had been reached, the underlying issues could have been discussed by other members in a reasoned manner. We've all been attacked at some point on this forum, doesn't mean that you have immediately to press the nuclear button.

Jim

[Mountain Goat]

There are many versions of web-based floorplan products available, with hotlinks to images, video and panoramas - there is nothing new in this concept - they've been used by real estate companies for years.

Brooke, would you mind clarifying two points:

1) Have you been approached by me in connection with your floorplan tutorial and, to quote, '....MG even pumped Brooke for more information to develop it...'? I don't even know your email address and no PMs that I can see, so it seems unlikely.

and the nub of the whole palava above:

2) Do you feel your copyright in this matter has been breached in any way? I'm not sure exactly what this refers to but it could be code / text / original concept.

Thanks.

MG

[vrooje]

I admit that I can see both sides of this argument. Within a few posts of Annette's introduction to the forum, s/he was offering this as a commercial product. And A-two may have been more sensitive to this issue because some of Annette's first posts were those that (rather rudely, in my opinion) undercut A-two's owner-to-owner offer to create floor plans for others. If I were A-two, I would have been upset by that. It would certainly have influenced my opinion of Annette, despite the fact that other forum users who later took Annette up on the offer have been very happy with it.

However, I also don't think that MG has done anything wrong here. MG, my answers to your questions are: no and no. I think, though, that A-two may have been referring to a post in the thread I mentioned above, where we talked about whether Floorplanner floor plans could be used to make a clickable floor plan. But perhaps not, since that was a general question rather than anything specific about coding, and e-Richard answered it before I did!

we're on an open internet forum and, even if members can be trusted to behave honourably, there are thousands of lurkers and casual passers-by who will happily help themselves without a qualm to your altruistically-published work. The brutal answer is: if you don't want something to be stolen, don't publish it here.

Yes, I think you're right. Anything else is not really practical, and anyway much of the advice given on this forum is available elsewhere -- it's the fact that so much of it is concentrated here that makes the forum so useful. I still learn new things here all the time, and I'm very thankful for it. So I'll continue to try and pay everyone back for the free advice by offering help where I can, with the possible exception of any million-dollar original ideas.

[Mountain Goat]

MG, my answers to your questions are: no and no.

Thanks, Brooke.

MG

[Rocket Rab]

I still learn new things here all the time, and I'm very thankful for it. So I'll continue to try and pay everyone back for the free advice by offering help where I can, with the possible exception of any million-dollar original ideas.

Brooke, I've benefited from your extremely generous help and advice on many occasions in the past, and I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate my sincere thanks to you for everything so freely given.