Taking GPS coordinates of a site... captain's permission?

[Dr. Lecter]

Stealing (copying or destroying) company data is illegal. Recording where you have been with your own GPS is not. I realize the numbers are the same in the end, but its how you get them that matters. If you sign a contract that prohibits your from using a GPS and do so anyway, then you can get you butt sued, but its not a criminal offense and the CG is not likely to do anything. If the captain ask you not to record and you do anyway, he can kick you off the boat just as he can for just about any reason he wants, but not much more, legally anyway.

This is the correct response. Assuming you've contracted to not record GPS information during the voyage, you could be sued for breach of contract if you do so (good luck to them in proving a concrete number for damages, though). And they could refuse to provide further services under the contract.

But some of the other stuff I've seen tossed around in this thread by persons who forget just what authority a captain does and does not have on their vessel amuses me. Tossing a piece of gear overboard is at least an intentional propery tort that will result in your paying for the replacement cost of the gear destroyed, if not punitives for the intentional nature of the tort. It may also be criminal destruction of property. Depending on how you take the gear from the objectionable diver, you may be commiting an assault and/or battery -- intentional tort with prospect of punitive damages, and criminal charges there, too. Suffice to say that any captain who secured a diver who breached their no-GPS contract in a 4'x4' jail on board the ship would (at the very least) wind up turning the dive boat over in order to pay the judgment against them -- unlawful imprisonment carries with it harsh civil and criminal penalties.

At the end of the day, you can run your salty mouth about protecting your numbers all you like. You can refuse to do anything more than return an offending diver to the dock and bar them from the boat without refund. But you cannot run around destroying property, physically engaging others, or locking them up because you suffered a breach of contract. Self-help is not available to you for that harm, no matter how much you think it should be.

 

[John_B]

Charters dont publish charts, books, hang logs, etc.

The wrong numbers are getting disseminated somehow...

 

[Tigerman]

This is the correct response. Assuming you've contracted to not record GPS information during the voyage...
...

See that part there? Thats the whole thing for most of the people here and what seemingly WASNT done in the OPs post..
The entire point some people try to make in this thread is that it SHOULD be contracted BEFOREHAND and not slapped in your face with threats of property destruction when theier on the site logging their numbers while others seem to think that youre not supposed to record gps data while on a boat AT ALL without prior acceptance and that acceptance should never be implied by the lack of restriction..

 

[Dr. Lecter]

See that part there? Thats the whole thing for most of the people here and what seemingly WASNT done in the OPs post..
The entire point some people try to make in this thread is that it SHOULD be contracted BEFOREHAND and not slapped in your face with threats of property destruction when theier on the site logging their numbers while others seem to think that youre not supposed to record gps data while on a boat AT ALL without prior acceptance and that acceptance should never be implied by the lack of restriction..

Shrug... I don't really see the issue. When I go diving and log the dive, I eyeball where I think I was and drop a flag in MacDive. Unless you're returning to the site, why do you care about the numbers?

That said, if it's not in the contract and you ask nicely that I not use a GPS enabled device, I'll probably abide by your wishes. If you don't ask nicely, I will ignore you unless I want to dive with you in the future, just to respond to your dickish behavior in an appropriately dismissive way.

If you willfully destroy a piece of my property, I will make it the most expensive charter you've ever taken out. If you physically engage me in the process of wresting that property from me, I will probably put you out of business by the time I'm done. Should you try and put me in a 4'x4' cell, one or more of us won't be coming home and may the best man win. Unlike a breach of contract, that's a harm where self-help is available to the victim.

Others' reactions will vary, but this whole topic reeks of WTF?!

 

[Reck Diver]

This is the correct response. Assuming you've contracted to not record GPS information during the voyage, you could be sued for breach of contract if you do so (good luck to them in proving a concrete number for damages, though). And they could refuse to provide further services under the contract.

But some of the other stuff I've seen tossed around in this thread by persons who forget just what authority a captain does and does not have on their vessel amuses me. Tossing a piece of gear overboard is at least an intentional propery tort that will result in your paying for the replacement cost of the gear destroyed, if not punitives for the intentional nature of the tort. It may also be criminal destruction of property. Depending on how you take the gear from the objectionable diver, you may be commiting an assault and/or battery -- intentional tort with prospect of punitive damages, and criminal charges there, too. Suffice to say that any captain who secured a diver who breached their no-GPS contract in a 4'x4' jail on board the ship would (at the very least) wind up turning the dive boat over in order to pay the judgment against them -- unlawful imprisonment carries with it harsh civil and criminal penalties.

At the end of the day, you can run your salty mouth about protecting your numbers all you like. You can refuse to do anything more than return an offending diver to the dock and bar them from the boat without refund. But you cannot run around destroying property, physically engaging others, or locking them up because you suffered a breach of contract. Self-help is not available to you for that harm, no matter how much you think it should be.

I'll be brief. You are mistaken.

 

[NAM001]

Is this captain going to exercise his captain rights to putting you in a brig or keel hauling. This is the very extreemist action that is being talked about. The gps locations on the fishing boat,, were the loations obtained while in the companies employ or part of the captain package when hired or part of the boat when bought. This is 3 different things. And in the case of the sold boat. Why shouldnt the man erase the locations IF the data was his. The buyer bought the boat not the day to day operations. Is the buyer entitled to have the picture of the captialns wife that is on the dashblard also. The boat was sold not the intel aboard, or the mates that go to sea with the boat. If the company wanted to sell that info they should have included it in the inventory of what was being sold. To buy a boat,, it is expected that you get the propulsion with the boat, not the list of favority radiw stations that are listened to........ This is only a guess. The buyer had no need for the boat, What he may have done was to buy the boat after failing to successfully obtain the secure locations by other means. No one here knows the detail of the sale. I certainly would not expect to get the dive locations just because i obtained the boat. That level of expectation is far above the level that is related to this thread. For tha sea captains out there .... What would have happened if the new owner used the waypoints that were in the gps and ran aground. Whose fault???? the new owner of the previous owner. At this point some should say that , that is a different matter all together. This discussion reminds me of the old controversy of the satalite dish. Are you steeling satalite or receiving what is legal to receive. The satalite co's had to go to encrypted data to claim thier rights to the signal content. anyone can receive the data in its useless form. Your cable or satalite payment (in general) is for the decryption codes, not the signal. Perhaps the gps's should be password protected to obtain the data. In that case could the guy have been sued? He had the the way points but just could not access them. Would the previous owner be expected to release access controls that did not affect the operation of the gps as it was provided by the manufacturer? These points can be argued forever. One thing for sure is this. No boat captain will ever be willing to relinquish any legal or perceived power or authority related to his vessel. Including the information on how many rolls of tp are on boatrd.

A couple more examples.

1. A car pulls up near your house and sits there for 20 minutes. The house owner calls the cops. The cops find out he is downloading kiddie porn via your wireless connection. The FBI shows up and arrests the car owner for possesion and the home owner for operating a non-secured network. Had the homeowner used some filtering of any kind he would be off the hook ,,,, but because the system has no security the info is public domain and the home owner bears the responsibility of having the open system that provided the means to obtain the porn. The guy in the car did not dwonload it your system downloaded it. The difference is in whether the homeowners system was hacked or not to commit the porn crime.

From that example the law says that what is in the air/internet is free to take. The car did not violate any authorized access policy because non was in place. I will fully agree that on a boat the information that is on the boat is the domain of the boat. My passage does not allow access to location information by means of utilizing the ships equipment. In other words the boat is a taxi, I can not go under the hood. My fare does not buy that access. That is why boat operators will cover the location readouts when on site. Equally the taxi driver cant tell you to not look out the right window because doing so will tell the passsenger where he is.

2. A group of 4 shoppers go to 4 different grocery stores. theya are all on conference call with their govt paid for cell phone. They proceed down each isle and the conversation proceeds like this. Bounty paprer towels 298 for the 150 towel pack skew num ######. (pause) ok you buy that i will get the paper plates here. What RIGHTS do the store manager have to stop this practice as it, in this case, clearly is designed to cut into the owners revenues. Which leads into spoofers and call blockers ect.

Another one for the boat captains. How many of you have the dod charts that show war sunken ships. Ideally the answer is none. Those charts are safegaurded. Does that need to protect the locations of certain sunken vessels/containers/items prohibit the looking for them by those who do not have the charts. No.

I think the owners have this unreal expectation of secracy. Unreal because technology has made that expectation unatainable. We are no longer on sailing ships using rudimentary charts. And the location to treasure if on the chart would not lead you to the location. at best the island or area. The actual locations were obtained by local land marks. The intersection of north of the mounrtain peak and west of the water fall 30 paces from the only pine tree is the X in the sand. One had only to keep the local/island position data secret to protect ones tresure. If you dont want anyone to know you,, dont go there when the enemy is around. NOw we have satalite, you think you are alone but there is a picture of you or the ground disturbance where you once were. We divers do not care enough to go to these extreems. Why should we ,,,we have our cell phone's ect. to let us know. The locations are like guns. the harm comes from thier use. 99.999% do not use the info in a mannor that would be harmfull to the owners. The extent the concern is on par with being denied phone usage at the location of the police station because some could use that location for targeting info.

 

[redacted]

I'll be brief. You are mistaken.

In what way? Would you care to identify your operation? I didn't think so.

 

[Gombessa]

I'll be brief. You are mistaken.

You've responded to thoughtful posts with nothing more than this on several occasions here. I think people are interested in what you have to say, but you realize you are not adding any value to the conversation, right?

 

[gcarter]

With this I actually do agree. But where the disconnect comes in for me is the people that threaten to sue, physically confront, demand a return trip and money back......all when informed by the crew of the unwritten policy. OK, so they did not tell you up front. What kind of person does it take to ruin the trip for 5-11 other divers just because he was asked to stop doing something that has zero impact on the diving itself? Give me a break. Sometimes :turd: happens but as long as the request is put out there in a reasonable manner and the request will not impair your ability to enjoy the dives safely, then STFU and enjoy the dives (and don't worry about tipping because that type of self-centered individual likely goes out of their way to find a problem to get out of tipping). Then when you get home, come to ScubaBoard and whine about how terrible and evil they are (the OP was not asked in a reasonable manner and simply asked a question so this is not directed at them). Never go on their boat again and next time, know that if logging locations is THAT important to you, maybe you should take some responsibility and ask up front......not wait until you find out by accident one way or the other.

Again, it all boils down to trust. If notified that it is against policy (unwritten or otherwise), then the operator is then placing trust in you (the diver) to comply. Only you (the diver) can decide whether you are trustworthy or not.

Yes, that is a bit much.

 

[Dr. Lecter]

I'll be brief. You are mistaken.

You point me towards whatever statute or case you think supports your belief that the basics of tort and criminal law go out the window because you're on a boat, and I'll consider you something other than a misinformed layperson. Deal?