<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Could you please expand on this (and on the last paragraph in your response)?<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><i class="">The licence and its provisions, including the attribution requirement exist to further that mission, not as a purpose in itself.</i></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">How does the attribution requirement further the mission if it is violated?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Anticipating your answer along the lines that the violations are too rare to bother with, what is the magic number where they stop being insignifficant? Please note that the 10% of the violating web sites I (gu)estimated in my limited research do not tell the whole story. We have today <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution" class="">cases of companies</a> with widely used products that do not follow the attribution requirement.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Alexander</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 29 May 2024, at 10:36, Simon Poole <<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" class="">simon@poole.ch</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Things to note:</p><p class="">- any such scheme would have to be compliant with section 9.0 of
the ODbL, in particular it could only apply to unlicensed use
after the 30 day term available to the licensor to cure the
violation. In practical terms (with the exception of some very
specific jurisdictions) such a scheme is likely to be financially
net negative because you would end up in court most of the time.<br class="">
</p><p class="">- more importantly the OSMF exists ".. to support the OSM
project, run and protect the OSM database, and make it available
to all as Free and Open data." The licence and its provisions,
including the attribution requirement exist to further that
mission, not as a purpose in itself. Any enforcement of the
licence terms must take in to account if it actually supports the
mission of the whole, or put differently: OSM doesn't have the
mission to be a patent and copyright troll. A policy as you
suggest would likely diminish the use of OSM and scare away many
organisations. <br class="">
</p><p class="">All that said, your numbers show the exact opposite of what you
claim. In general attribution seems to be provided at a better
level that what could be expected and enforcement seems to work
quite well.</p><p class="">Simon<br class="">
</p><p class=""><br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 22.05.2024 um 10:04 schrieb
Alexander Zatko:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:360EE0B9-D243-41CD-8DE0-B6A059F09ABE@freemap.sk" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
Recently, I have submitted a <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KRQDVI3IpEvaVGW_pJhf_Ha7VzdOItGGxtITpTvsJjI/edit" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">proposal</a> to the LWG, of a
new mechanism for enforcing the license-stipulated attribution
requirement (AR). To date I have received no feedback from them,
which is why I am asking for opinions about the proposal on this
forum.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">In short, the proposed mechanism calls for requiring
the AR violators to cover the time and material expenses,
incurred by whoever takes the initiative to bring the violator
into compliance. The required compensation can have the form of
volunteer work or money, which would be used to reward the
people working on rectifying the violations.</div>
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">As I see it, the attribution requirement was
placed into the license for a reason, and the OSMF should <b class="">enforce</b> its compliance*. The volunteer-based
mechanism we have in place today is insufficient, as it does
not lead to active discovery of violations, nor generally
leads to resolutions of the known ones in a timely manner, or
at all. I belive my proposal is fair and at the same time
provides incentives for people to work on the cases. I do not
claim to have considered all aspects that might affect the
proposal implementability or desirability, which is why I am
looking forward to your comments.</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Alexander</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">* AFAIK, only OSMF can legally do so</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">legal-talk mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org" class="">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>