[OSM-legal-talk] Proper attribution

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

(me)
>>> Assuming for a moment that my contributions to OSM are copyrightable and
>>> the CC-BY-SA license is valid, then if I license my data CC-BY-SA I have
>>> the right to request anyone using my data, or building or using derived
>>> versions thereof, to provide attribution in the form I believe is
>>> required, and I can drag them to court if they don't.

(Ævar)
>> No you don't. You've just given them permission to use your works
>> under a license which dictates that distributors must attribute you
>> within the limited scope demanded of them by the license. As long as
>> they're otherwise in compliance you have no right to demand additional
>> attribution not required by the license.

(Martin)
> could you point me to the limitation part of the attribution in cc-by-sa?
> AFAIK you have to attribute all contributors.

Multiple misunderstandings here.

What I wanted to say, initially, was that the contributor decides which 
form of attribution he finds appropriate.

Ævar interpreted this as "the contributor can demand any kind of 
attribution" and said that I was wrong. Ævar is right in saying that the 
license does not allow the contributor to demand ANY kind of 
attribution. In fact it says:

"You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and give the 
Original Author credit reasonable to the medium or means You are 
utilizing by conveying the name (or pseudonym if applicable) of the 
Original Author if supplied; the title of the Work if supplied; to the 
extent reasonably practicable, the Uniform Resource Identifier, if any, 
that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work, unless such URI 
does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the 
Work..."

So the author may only request that his name/pseudonym, the title of the 
work, and an URL that he specifies are used as credits. (Still this is 
vastly more than supported by OSM.)

There is of course the soft factor of "reasonable to the medium or 
means", and it is always the licensor who has to find it reasonable. If 
you make a TV production and only list the licensor's name in the 
credits at the end, and the licensor then says that it would have been 
perfectly reasonable to show his name in the picture while his work was 
shown, then he *can* drag you to court over this - and whether he will 
win is anyone's guess.

Now you again misunderstood Ævar to say that a collective attribution is 
allowed. Ævar never said that.

There is an "opt-out" clause for attribution, where CC-BY-SA says:

"If You create a Derivative Work, upon notice from any Licensor You 
must, to the extent practicable, remove from the Derivative Work any 
reference to such Licensor or the Original Author, as requested."

So the licensors have the right to request that you remove the 
attribution; but it would be a far stretch to claim that by taking part 
in OSM licensors automatically do so.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"