Sorry to hear that Ed, we think this is a real shame. I was looking forward to working with you on this.We first approached Ed last week after we became aware of the project. Since it was similar to something we have been working on for the UKC logbooks, we were keen to see if we could combine efforts, however we did need to establish permission to use our database. Ed was slow to respond but, when he did, we explained the situation and increased our offer to open up our database. This was inline with what many have requested on this thread: to link the database so that new problems only need to be entered in one location. It would have also maintained consistent names and areas. Unfortunately Ed didn't want to collaborate although we have never had a discussion as to what shape the collaboration would take since we have only received two short emails from Ed despite making ourselves fully available for discussion.If you have a change of heart and want to get it going again then we would be happy to work with you and the offer we made remains open.For people's information, The Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/3032/contents/made assigns copyright to the effort of creating the database, not the data itself, which is mostly uncopyrightable facts like route names. At UKC we have never claimed we own data, just the database it is assembled in. It also assigns responsibility to protecting that database in both upkeep and when and where it is used. In this case we bent over backwards to try and make something that would work but we had to do something since, if we didn't, we would have been neglecting our responsibility to our database which would have left it open to use by significantly more commercial concerns than Ed.
... or employ Ed to do it!
Wouldn’t a collaboration with Peakbouldering.info have been viable?
