"Names" now appearing on Google Maps

[Jeremy Hakes]

Of recent, while viewing Google Maps/Earth, a bunch of the "common" (but unofficial) names for peaks (specifically Jefferson County, as that's where I was looking) now are "named" on Google Maps/Earth. Peaks like "Coffee Pot", "Tin Cup", "Forsberg", "Songer", and "Saulsbury" to name a few. Anyone notice others that we don't currently have listed as "named"? (Generally, those names denote historical reference which was not included in the most recent update of USGS maps, although several of those peaks were USGS named on old (late 1800's, early 1900's) maps.

[Steve Knapp]

I believe they are using data from LoJ. The licensing agreement should eventually pay John enough to retire and climb 5 days a week!

[John Kirk]

I posted this back in April. It has been really frustrating that the names have not been removed.

[Jeremy Hakes]

Whoah. So somehow it went from to peaklist.org to Google? Seems like if they are going to use your data sets, you should get some kick back from it. Or at least explicit permission from you/ . Interesting. Are you going to do a "cease and desist" order soon?

[TWorth]

Just a late follow up on this. No doubt, those names are taken from the lists at this site. One quick example, Copper Mountain North and South in Fremont County, Wyoming. I've hiked in the area and looked at all the maps. There are no previous maps which refer to those points with those exact labels, it's always been just Copper Mountain. Same thing in GNIS. There are probably hundreds of other examples just like this.

Not surprising Mr Maizlish has been silent on the subject as to how those names got there.

As mentioned, the google maps are using old versions of the place names, guessing from 2008. There have been many corrections since then, so the data set they are using is outdated, and doesn't include names in states that have been subsequently listed. Also unoffical names are included but not marked as such. In addition, some unoffical names can be found using the search function, while others cannot. Hard to believe all this made it past the Google QA department.

In short, what they are presenting as far as place names is inferior to what can be found at this donations-only site and even other, similarly non-commercial geographic data sites.

[TeresaGergen]

There's a currently active thread on summitpost.org about this right now, with a lot of thread drift:
http://www.summitpost.org/phpBB2/viewto ... highlight=