[OSM-legal-talk] Post-Changeover Attribution
ml at creativecommons.org
Tue Mar 6 20:30:55 GMT 2012
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
> On 06/03/12 18:07, Michael Collinson wrote:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ/ODbL 3a. I would like to use
>> OpenStreetMap maps. How should I credit you?
> I recommend "Map tiles copyright OpenStreetMap, licenced CC-BY-SA", as
> that works better with BY-SA's requirement of a copyright notice.
BY-SA doesn't require a copyright notice. It requires keeping intact
copyright notices that are provided, as well as license notice. Given
that copyright is automatic, many licensors don't provide the former,
though it may be useful to do so anyway for education. The notices
provided by CC don't include an explicit copyright notice.
> Spelling out "Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike v3.0" and adding
> years to each notice wouldn't hurt either.
It seems to me space is at a premium in the corner of a map or a
caption, and spelling out doesn't gain much, but that's just my
Just as an experiment in brevity
©OpenStreetMap data ODbL[ tiles BY-SA]
With "OpenStreetMap", "ODbL", and "BY-SA" linked to the obvious
places,  when tiles used.
> I also recommend using the *word* "copyright" rather than (c), as it is
> my understanding that the English word has international legal weight
> but the copyright symbol or its ASCII equivalent doesn't.
That's the oddest thing I've read today. Really?
> For offline works, CC recommend this text (sorry for the url):
Nobody has ever sent a request for a copy of a license via post,
AFAIK. :) But the full license URL should be provided, not
"www.creativecommons.org". Same is true of ODbL which says "If
hyperlinks are not possible, You should include the plain text of the
required URI’s with the above notice."
More information about the legal-talk