[OSM-legal-talk] Preventing vandalism by omitting attribution?
stefan.baebler at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 07:51:12 UTC 2015
Over the weekend i noticed an insurance company's advertisement for driver
grading app, which is:
a) showing OSM map tiles with no attribution (neither by the map nor in any
b) presumably using OSM's maxspeed data to detect traffic violations from
The insurance company is giving discounts to "safe" drivers based on their
Nice approach to improve traffic safety and increase their profits.
It is fairly obvious that they should add the attribution for the tiles at
least, but increased OSM visibility/recognition might encourage vandalism
(raising maxspeed limits or simply deleting them or even deleting the whole
roads / areas) with monetary incentive.
How about if they show other (eg Google tiles) but still use OSM data in
their backend for grading? Where should the attribution be placed in such
We haven't contacted the offender yet, so we don't know yet if they even
realize their contractor is offering the service based on OSM data or are
they purposely omitting attribution, violating the OSM license in the
How can we accurately verify OSM use in the backend without introducing
bogus (copyright easter egg) maxspeed data?
Are there any legal requirements regarding their data (driver's gathered
traces, their OSM data fixes) towards OSM? Probably not for traces, but
any possibly fixed OSM data should be contributed back to OSM. (Easter eggs
in form of 1km/h speed limit around their offices comes to mind :) )
Is there any prior practice with such situations? Any suggestions as to how
to proceed in this specific situation apart from what is already written in
wiki ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution ) ?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the legal-talk