[OSM-talk-be] Copyright violation on massively distributed flyers

[Glenn Plas]

I don't think ignorance is a valid excuse for not exercising due
diligence.  Especially in the publicity sector which is prone to
copyright violations. e.g.  They should know better in that sector.

That being said, reality is indeed that people don't seem to care, so to
raise awareness we should be gentle , yet determined in raising the bar
overall.

So sending those kind of letters is the right action to take imho.

Glenn

On 03-08-16 15:49, Pieter-Jan Pauwels wrote:
> Hi Ruben, 
> 
> Don’t get me wrong, I totally agree with your email, only your sentence
> about the attribution requirement being deliberately neglected seems way
> off. I have a non-print marketing background and I can tell you nobody
> knows the anything about licenses in re-using materials (except
> contributors and legal counselors). I’ve been evangelising open licenses
> for over 2 years now and I still get the same reaction from high level
> marketeers to uni students: “What do you mean we can use Images on
> Google Images? Then why would they make them available in the first
> place?”  And that’s just for images, let alone, data or virtual maps. 
> 
> So yes contact them, but don’t start with going in offensive mode by
> tapping them on the fingers. Awareness and open discussions bring in
> more souls to the (l)(r)ight side. 
> Maybe we should consider more info on http://osm.be/nl/usage about how
> the license applies when graphically copying or screenshotting the map,
> because now it’s very data focused, no? 
> 
> Don’t let this stop you from sharing such examples though. The more we
> know how maps are reused and misused, the better we can handle it in the
> future.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Pieter-Jan Pauwels
> 	
> Community Coordinator
> Open Knowledge Belgium
> m: +32 476 66 27 77 a: Sint-Salvatorstraat 18/101, 9000 Gent
> s: www.openknowledge.be
> <http://www.openknowledge.be/> e: pieterjan at openknowledge.be
> <mailto:pieterjan at openknowledge.be>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 03 Aug 2016, at 15:30, Ruben Maes <ruben at janmaes.com
>> <mailto:ruben at janmaes.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I have a feeling that they were actually aware of the attribution
>> requirement, but deliberately didn't do it because it's difficult for
>> us to act on.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>