<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>20 Feb 2020, 18:44 by simon@poole.ch:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><br></div><div>Am 19.02.2020 um 14:24 schrieb Christoph Hormann:<br></div><blockquote><div>In this case the statement that "small maps or multiple data sources" <br></div><div>are the only cases where the document does not require visible <br></div><div>attribution is wrong. For example it is later stated that visible <br></div><div>attribution is not required if "there is legal or safety or privacy <br></div><div>information that needs to be presented with similar or greater <br></div><div>prominence to attribution" - which at least in the EU is always the <br></div><div>case!<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>So you agree with us that this is an actual external restraint that<br></div><div>needs to be considered, and it is not the LWG succumbing to the<br></div><div>interests of big $$$?<br></div></blockquote><div>External constraints are not overriding<br></div><div>ODBL that requires that users are aware<br></div><div>of source of data.<br></div><div><br></div><div>If someone is unwilling to do that then</div><div>they are unable to use OSM data<br></div><div>legally.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Let's not pretend that Mapbox-style<br></div><div>attribution hiding is enough to<br></div><div>make source of data clear.</div> </body>
</html>