<html><head></head><body>"they do not cover one of the major bones of contention"<br>Which one if I may?<br>Regards, Yves <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Le 15 juin 2021 16:55:54 GMT+02:00, Simon Poole <simon@poole.ch> a écrit :<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre dir="auto" class="k9mail"><br>Am 15.06.2021 um 07:05 schrieb steveaOSM:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> ...<br> OSM has let too many, for far too long, get away with way too much in this regard. It is overdue that we end this abuse of our requirements to properly attribute OSM as the copyright holder of the map data being used.<br><br> No exceptions. None. None whatsoever. “No matter what." Is this clear enough? We can’t mess around with this: it is perhaps THE most serious thing OSMF must protect and defend.<br> ...<br></blockquote><br>I've been stocking up on ropes as of late, I would quote you a volume <br>discount for say a 100 or so.<br><br>Seriously the "new" guidelines are no more enforceable as the previous <br>texts and as they do not cover one of the major bones of contention, and <br>do not really change the catch 22 situation some users will find <br>themselves in.<br><br>Assuming that the intent is that we want OSM data to be used in the 1st <br>place, something I now and then doubt.<br><br>Simon<br><br><br></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>