Is Rock Deluxe bad for your local climbing community?? Speak Out
9 July 2011 - 4:43pm
Rock Deluxe is bad for local climbing communitites.
Why?
1. Because visiting climbers buy the "national format" guide and bypass the local guide.
2. Editors of Rock Deluxe profit personally and do not support local climbing resources.
3. Many people that buy Rock Deluxe freedom camp free and leave their feces and rubbish behind.
4. Local merchants who sell the local guidebook are annoyed with people trying to read the local guide without paying for it.
5. Rock Deluxe publication puts local clubs at risk of financial failure.
6. Rock Deluxe publication makes local guidebooks more expensive because of lost sales opportunity.
7. Some people that buy Rock Deluxe chase livestock on private property - bugger the local climbing community and bugger the sheep in one foul swoop.
8. Local volunteers become discouraged and fade away when others personal profit from their hard work.
9. Corporate guidebooks strip revenue from local climbing communites, which is bad for the future of NZ climbing.
10. Private property access is threatened when local information is published in national guidebooks.
9 July 2011 - 9:12pm
#2
2. Editors of Rock Deluxe profit personally
I think your definition of "profit" is different than mine.
10 July 2011 - 5:22pm
#3
If I was a traveller I would probably buy a book that had a taste of many area's.
In providing a different service you hope that they would respect the Wanaka club by giving limited info so that guide is needed for more than a flying visit. (I personally think 10-20 classic routes is a good taste of an area, Many guides in europe are like that)
I was personally dissapointed Rock De Lux had incorrect info on Wye creek. They said seems OK to camp when it was not resulting in a large number of visitors camping and deficating all over the Farmers land. This was irresponsible and could have endangered access.
A local guide will have More upto date info on new routes, and new areas. If you are a frequent visitor Please support the resources you are using by Buying the local guide
WRCC I update my Wanaka guide from your blog..I would probably buy a new guide more often if that info wasn't so easily accesible.
11 July 2011 - 6:11am
#4
I have a few views on your post and will pen them later but I wonder what your view is when overseas based communities of climbers like thecrag/ UKC/Rockclimbing.com etc develop online Guidebooks to Wanaka? or the local NZAC climbnz? These wiki's are much more the climbing community with envolvement available to all and offer a lot to the area.
Unfortunately the model you are used to IS changingand may not continue to fund your route development it does not however mean it will destroy the community.
I think to say that a Rock eluxe users will be the ones crapping everywhere is very narrow minded. Like that all overnight campers with mini vans will also. It doesn't matter what book you carry - if you are not schooled in how to shit in the woods you will probably make a mess of it and that is just as likely to be a sport climber from Wellington or a Gym bunny as a climber grasping their Rock deLuxe
I guess Simon Mentz and Glen Tempest don't profit from their Arapiles Guide nor Simon Carter from his Blue Mountains one?
11 July 2011 - 11:22am
#5
Nobody is arguing there may be a need for a “Good Quality” select guide that covers all of New Zealand! And, we are not arguing about the merits, good and bad, of Rock Deluxe as a “publication.” This is not a personal attack against the editors of Rock Deluxe.
Rather, we object to the concept of individuals making significant sums of money for their own benefit. Additionally, we strongly object to the concept of New Zealand Alpine Club distributing this book as a NZAC Publication in competition with local climbing communities.
In the past, NZAC has paid small sums to volunteer editors for expenses rendered. It is not inconceivable to then directly allocate sums of money, minus the cost of administration, to organized local climbing communities.
prof·it
1. An advantageous gain or return; benefit.
2. The return received on a business undertaking after all operating expenses have been met.
3. The return received on an investment after all charges have been paid. Often used in the plural.
non·prof·it
1. not established for the purpose of making a profit; not entered into for money:
A nonprofit organization does not distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders as income, but instead uses them to help pursue its goals.
11 July 2011 - 12:21pm
#6
In the past, NZAC has paid small sums to volunteer editors for expenses rendered. It is not inconceivable to then directly allocate sums of money, minus the cost of administration, to organized local climbing communities.
Not sure what you mean? Can you explain more?
11 July 2011 - 11:18am
#7
NZAC can be commended for starting climbnz.org.nz. The concept of a consolidated national database has merit because it transcends generations of climbers, possibly even NZAC.
Unfortunately, I think the creative commons concept is misguided and irrelevant. Basic information is legally considered public domain and the editors of Rock Deluxe have all but dismissed any copyright problems because they will simply alter, for better or worse, the information. To my knowledge, they have not asked anybody for approval. To be sure, they will be benefitting from years of “sweat of the brow.” And, they will most certainly be standing upon the shoulders, and possibly other body parts, of many individuals in the collective climbing community.
With their creative commons license, NZAC reserves the right to approve commercial and non-commercial works, which is completely self serving. It would better serve the purpose of NZAC to work for the benefit of local climbing communities rather than collect information to suit their own purpose.
14 July 2011 - 8:57pm
#8
It is unfortunate that you think Creative Commons is misguided and irrelevant. I'm curious as to what licensing arrangement you think might be better than the CC BY-NC-SA license adopted for climb.org.nz.
It's not correct to say that the license means that NZAC approves non-commercial works. The license explicitly grants permission for non-commercial works, so NZAC would not be in the role of "approving" such works. The same license applies to derivative works, meaning the whole climbing community can benefit from the data and its reuse.
FYI, the NZ government is standardising on Creative Commons via NZGOAL.
11 July 2011 - 12:33pm
#9
creative commons license, NZAC reserves the right to approve commercial and non-commercial works
No that's not right. The reason for a creative commons licence is specifically to allow all non-commercial use. A traditional all rights reserved copyright notice would not.
Yes, commercial use of information on climbNZ does need approval from NZAC. That's not self-serving it's common sense - otherwise anyone could use the information for "personal profit" as you put it.
11 July 2011 - 3:34pm
#10
I'll repeat, the editors of Rock Deluxe have never asked for approval to use information from the Wanaka Area. They contend that they have the right to use climbing information from the Wanaka Area because it is public domain. Information in the public domain does not require a creative commons license.
Of course, the information and layout cannot be copied exactly, but all they need to do is change the wording slightly from "climb up and right" to "climb up then right" or some other ambiguous dirivative.
Nobody has to ask for approval from NZAC or anybody else if they want to copy and then manipulate the information. In fact, the new website is making it very easy for people to flog the system.
11 July 2011 - 3:47pm
#11
Once again, I would like for NZAC to withdraw support for Rock Deluxe and let them go it alone. Let them do their own marketing and distribution. That would be a far more level playing field if non profit organizations are meant to complete with commercial publishers.
Alternatively, leave Wanaka Area out of the book completely.
15 July 2011 - 12:40pm
#12
In this situation, we are not talking about non-commercial use. The Rock Deluxe project is clearly commercial. And NZAC is on shaking ground supporting it because it is a commercial venture.
I have nothing against the Creative Commons License concept. But, it has nothing to do with this situation because the editors of Rock Deluxe are not using our copyright material, at least to my knowledge. We have certainly not given them permission to use our copyright material.
Rather, the editors of Rock Deluxe are using all previous information, published or otherwise, along with their own field study, as a foundation for their new work.
The basic facts are public domain and the rest of the information can be altered to suit the format. Any editor, anywhere, can do the same. In fact, we can now, or the near future, take the work created by the editors of Rock Deluxe or any other guide and use it as a foundation for a new work.
This is why I have said the CC license is irrelevant.
This case study is interesting:
"Zenbu is a collection of facts from the real world, the same basic information that you can see on shop signs as you walk down the street: names, addresses, phone numbers, opening hours. Everyone agrees that facts can not be subject to copyright but, according to an early conversation I had with a Yellow Pages IP lawyer, "version of fact" can be copyright. Interestingly an Australian Federal court recently ruled that Sensis has no copyright in the White or Yellow Pages. This issue is a field day for lawyers and a minefield for everyone else."
Apparently even version of fact is open slather.
Why does climbnz even need the license when there is no copyright law to defend.
I think it boils down to the ethics of the parties involved, as much as anything.
NZAC should not support commercial ventures (full stop). Especially, when that support negatively effects the fundraising efforts of local climbing communities.
15 July 2011 - 2:41pm
#13
I have no comment to make on the relevance of CC to Rock Deluxe. CC was chosen for ClimbNZ because we are using existing guidebooks to seed the database. All Rights Reserved would be the default license on those works. In some cases NZAC holds copyright and in other cases the rights holder is not NZAC. We've been contacting many of them and most have agreed to make the material available under the more permissive CC license.
The fact of a particular route and grade in a particular place may or may not be copyrightable in a database but the compilation of such facts almost certainly is. Refer paras 179,180,181 of the NZGOAL document. The descriptions and maps and photos are also protected by copyright by default.
15 July 2011 - 2:56pm
#14
As justification for including Wanaka Area route information without a donation. Ivan Vostinar, stated that he had the responsibility to inform the un-suspecting public about inaccurracies in the Wanaka publication.
On the other hand, he was very pleased with the work of Lindsay Main, who he mentioned was "spot on the mark."
I decided to take a look through some of the route information and descriptions presented on climbnz.org.nz to gain some insight into how "it is supposed to be done." Truth, I did not have to look far to find major inconsistencies, ommissions and anecdotal references that leave much to imagination.
This information is in no way a stab at volunteer contributors involved with climbnz or anybody else. I merely want to point out that Ivan's justification is purely for his own self interest and he should not tell people otherwise.
Example 1 has an innacurate bolt count and no route length listed.
"Itchy Schratchy - Starts just to the right of The Plague but moves right to another groove, finishing just left of the prominent arete. About eight bolts. Marcus Thomas, 1999."
Example 2 has an anecdotal description that does little to help the climber find their way. Route length is listed as 28 metres. Wow, 4 bolts in 28M. There is no mention of natural protection but I have to assume it might be needed, just a little.
"Spanking Wendy - Gentle pats on the bottom lead to greater excitement. No prophylactics available until you're already in the big scoop and halfway there - don't lose control. Four bolts. Guy Cotter '89"
15 July 2011 - 3:03pm
#15
Sweet, feel free to login to http://climbnz.org.nz and make the changes you think will improve the data.
15 July 2011 - 3:25pm
#16
Jonathon, you may be missing the point that climbnz.org could be unwittingly facilitating the commercial use of this information by unscrupulous commercial ventures. Anyone can cut, paste, alter and/or manipulate that information. With a consolidated database, it will be one stop shopping for everyone.
Do you really think they will ask anyone for permission to flog the system. Personally, I don't think so.
15 July 2011 - 3:33pm
#17
If it's clear that someone has infringed copyright, there are remedies available, including the Copyright Tribunal. If they reference the database but alter the content sufficiently so as to not obviously infringe, then it probably won't be possible to detect. There is nothing we can do about that, short of abandoning the project altogether. Is that what you suggest?
15 July 2011 - 3:29pm
#18
I think you might want to contact Ivan, apparently he has the most up to date and accurate information available.
I think Rock Deluxe is a fantastic guidebook. Almost all of your points are either purely speculative, injustly inflammatory or irrelevant. The only point that you make that could be true is #2. I don't know the editors, but I don't imagine they do their hard work for free. But it is an NZAC publication, and the NZAC does A LOT for local climbing communities and individual crags.
The reality is that most NZ crags are not big enough to have a whole guidebook dedicated to one crag. If an area is big enough (like Castle Hill, or Wanaka), then the dedicated local climber will buy the appropriate, more complete guide. It makes much more financial sense for someone in the guidebook market to buy one guidebook that covers, even incompletely, multiple areas. Name a travelling climber that wants to drive around with a library of 20-page, $30 guidebooks. These travelling climbers aren't made of money (neither are most of the locals, for that matter).
The market will go with the superior product. If you can't compete, then don't.
in the rain