<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Arial">
<blockquote type="cite">Where in CC-BY-SA's license does it say
that attribution must be on top of an image</blockquote>
As written on CC-BY-SA<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial">
<blockquote type="cite">
<p><strong>Attribution</strong>.</p>
<p>If You Share the Licensed Material (including in modified
form), You must:</p>
retain the following if it is supplied by the Licensor with
the Licensed Material:
<ol type="i">
<li id="s3a1Ai">identification of the creator(s) of the
Licensed Material and any others designated to receive
attribution, in any r<u><b>easonable manner requested by
the Licensor</b></u> (including by pseudonym if
designated);</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial"> in </font><font face="Arial"><font
face="Arial">3 a 1 A 1</font>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode</a></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial">
<blockquote type="cite">that no interaction is allowed???</blockquote>
<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial">it says:</font></p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">4.3 Notice for using output (Contents).
Creating and Using a Produced<br>
Work does not require the notice in Section 4.2. However, if you<br>
Publicly Use a Produced Work, <u>You must include a notice
associated with</u><u><br>
</u><u>
the Produced Work</u> reasonably calculated to make any Person
that uses,<br>
<u>views,</u> accesses, interacts with, or is <u>otherwise
exposed</u> to the Produced<br>
Work aware that Content was obtained from the Database,
Derivative<br>
Database, or the Database as part of a Collective Database, and
that it<br>
is available under this License.</blockquote>
If you can explain me how "reasonably calculated" to anyone that
views or is exposed means that no attribution must be visibly on
the Produced work. Feel free, i would like to know.</p>
<p>Unless OSMF when we switched from CC to ODbL mislead the
contributors and it's contributor terms, which i highly doubt.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Let's do an exercise.</p>
<p>LiveStream, a company of Vimeo uses OSM data on their website via
a third party provider (Mapbox). I contacted LiveStream to comply
with the license, they reply they are not using OSM data. Strange
since i see my contributions on it, maybe they are not aware
(being premium clients doesn't allow you to remove the
attribution, other than the service provider, Mapbox). Asked them
who sold them my data without complying with the license that i
agreed my content to be distributed under. For over one month
their legal department is still checking this.<br>
</p>
<p>Link with a map example (feel free to browse to your contribution
area), click on the "i" for the map to display
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://livestream.com/accounts/9869799/events/7517661">https://livestream.com/accounts/9869799/events/7517661</a> printscreen
of the maphttps://ibb.co/TH4LbFp</p>
<p>Now the questions:<br>
</p>
<p>1 - Are they fulfilling the license?</p>
<p>a) yes</p>
<p>B) no</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>2 - Who's responsible?</p>
<p>a) Mapbox <br>
</p>
<p>b) LiveStream/Vimeo</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>But following your "Where in CC-BY-SA's license does it say that
attribution must be on top of an image or that no interaction is
allowed", i have search all LiveStream website and there's no
notice at all of OSM data. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>3 - Who's not aware?</p>
<p>a) Mapbox, an OSMF corporate member</p>
<p>b) LiveStream/Vimeo, client of Mapbox<br>
</p>
<p>c) contributors/OSMF<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Às 18:56 de 09/08/2019, Kathleen Lu
escreveu:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAFekdnAOiHUCdN9rN1Q7LYGzeDzm5-ggQ9n43m9064UjqSJ4xg@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Where in CC-BY-SA's license does it say that attribution
must be on top of an image or that no interaction is
allowed???</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:17
AM Nuno Caldeira <<a
href="mailto:nunocapelocaldeira@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">nunocapelocaldeira@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Arial">So you are saying that when we
switched from CC to ODbL, the bellow quote was not
true?<br>
</font></p>
<font face="Arial"> </font>
<p> </p>
<blockquote type="cite"><font face="Arial">Both licenses
are “By Attribution” and “Share Alike”.</font></blockquote>
<font face="Arial"> </font>
<p><font face="Arial"><a
class="gmail-m_5489501546518959442moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Historic/We_Are_Changing_The_License#What_are_the_main_differences_between_the_old_and_the_new_license.3F"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Historic/We_Are_Changing_The_License#What_are_the_main_differences_between_the_old_and_the_new_license.3F</a><br>
</font></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><font face="Arial">Also the license is clear, anyone
that views, i don't have to interact to acknowledge
the notice.</font><br>
</p>
<div class="gmail-m_5489501546518959442moz-cite-prefix">Às
18:08 de 09/08/2019, Kathleen Lu escreveu:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Guidelines by the licensor<br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote type="cite">On legal advice, <b>what
a Licensor says carries weight with users of
our data and, potentially, to a judge</b>. A
court would make a final decision on the
issue, however we hope these guidelines are
helpful to <b>avoid </b>disputes arising in
the first place and can be considered by the
courts in coming to their verdict. </blockquote>
<p> from <a
class="gmail-m_5489501546518959442gmail-m_6680811998581528453moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines</a></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Nuno, you are quoting this like it's the law,
but what you have quoted here isn't the *law*,
it's what *OSMF* thinks *might* happen and what
motivates OSMF to put out guidelines. Frankly,
OSMF can choose to change the language you have
quoted as a part of changing the guidelines! <br>
</div>
<div>Under the law, the licensor's opinion, as one
party to the contract, is taken into
consideration. However, it is *not* the only thing
that matters. The words of the licence matter
more, and if there is a conflict between what the
licensor thinks and what the licence says, the
words of the licence will control. In that case,
the licensor is simply "wrong" (and there are
plenty of cases where that was the end result).</div>
<div>You are right that we hope to avoid disputes by
setting out reasonable guidelines, but if OSMF
sets out guidelines that are unreasonable and not
tied to the language of the licence, then no one,
either users of the data or judges, will listen to
OSMF, and, under the law, rightly so.<br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>