oship-dev team mailing list archive

[Tim Cook <timothywayne.cook@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 05:22 -0300, Tim Cook wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 20:20 -0700, Eric (Google) wrote:
> > According to the API Terms of Service:
> > 
> > " 2.1 Permission to Use. You may use: (a) the Health API to access
> > Google Health, and (b) the Health Service API Specifications for
> > development for a Health API Client that is designed for usage by
> > United States users of Google Health. You shall not provide access to
> > or assign the permission to use the Health API to any third party."
> > 
> > Eric
> > -~------~--~---
> 
> 
> So, (IANAL) if I read2.1(b) correctly then this means that the Google
> Health API cannot be included in ANY open source software that may be
> available for distribution outside of the United States?

Hmmmm, on reading this again. It would seem that even proprietary
vendors cannot include the API in their products.  So do they have to
contract with their clients after the sale to add the GH API if the end
user (third party) wants an interface with GH?

BTW: how do you plan to handle US Citizens (such as myself) with US
physicians that are currently residing in another country?

This brings up  another edge case (though there are tens if not hundreds
of thousands of us).  If my US based physician has a product with an API
installed for GH.  Am I restricted from using GH because I am currently
outside the US?  What about people simply traveling on vacation to a
foreign country?  Seems they would be the US citizens that would need a
PHR the most.

Maybe the legal dept. should re-think the usefulness of GH under broader
circumstances?


Thanks,
Tim

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part