[NLP-er]

Originally Posted by imported_silkroad

This is not in the Google TOS (sorry to correct you). So, this statement is not correct.

I see no problem in correcting
Also you are wrong about referral header. You assumed that all conditions are in one place - and this is not safe assumption. You can find TOS on other pages too - this particular you will find here:
http://code.google.com/intl/pl-PL/ap...l#_intro_fonje

"Applications MUST always include a valid and accurate http referer header in their requests."

Big letters in MUST are not added by me - it is written this way in Google documentation, so i think that clearly marks Google position in this area

Originally Posted by imported_silkroad

In addition, when Google blocks access to their API this is not "banned by Google" ... it is called "blocked to use the API".

Different word - same meaning and same results. And I think that everybody understood it correctly.

BTW - Are you a lawyer? I'm looking one, because some guy stole my code, and I see that you like to use exact words, even if substitute has same meaning, so I thought that maybe you can help me with my issue If yes please PM me - thanks:up:

Originally Posted by imported_silkroad

Sorry, but this is also incorrect. There is no text in the Google TOS that requires the use of their logo. I am confused why you post incorrect information like this. You are normally accurate. Google's TOS has not changed. There is no requirement in the same TOS for referral headers and no requirement for a logo.

I'm confused why you are still confused - you get exact answer from Google. So if you think they are wrong, please contact them and discus their position. I cannot tell you why they interpret it in such way. But I can tell you that not applying you put yourself in a risk to be banned ("blocked to use the API"). And if you want to know why I give this information to my user, then the answer is very simple: because I care about my users

So is there really any issue or it is only about using exact words from documentation and being better in reading it?
You are better and I still care about my users, so my recommendation is still the same - use Google logo

Reading 2 posts in row about the same + PM, I get impression that it is only about proving some point and It has totally no reflection in reality since you applied Google logo yourself. So what is the real point here, and can we close it?

Originally Posted by imported_silkroad

It might be "good" or "nice" to add the logo, but it is certainly not required by the "actual Google conditions" (and you said).

Yes I said.

Originally Posted by imported_silkroad

This is unlike you NPL-er !! You are normally very factual. Are you under some stress or pressure?

Stress - not at all. Pressure - of course yes. Every second counts when my users are in danger of being banned ("blocked to use the API" - sorry, but banned is just simpler ), so I made all changes, made tests and give people what makes them safe as fast as I could. I didn't thought to discuss with Google about wrong TOS interpretation by their own staff.

Truly saying I still don't see the point - what is the point of having right when you loose and your forum is banned?...

When people are with me, they are with the man who thinks how to win...

Sounds like commercial haha

Originally Posted by imported_silkroad

Take it easy!!!

Booth way?...