[OSM-talk] a license violation?

[Christopher Woods (IWD)]

On 02/01/2013 10:46, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2013/1/2 Robin Paulson <robin at bumblepuppy.org>:
>> i was looking for unusual uses of osm data, and found this:
>>
>> http://store.axismaps.com/product/boston-blue
>
> "Oops! We couldn’t find that page."
Took a quick look at the store homepage and clicked through to the 
"Boston typographic map" (they're all the same AFAICT). All printed maps 
don't appear to state origin of data used as a basis for map layouts. As 
such, although they're not simple reprints of tiles (for e.g.) the 
licence is still being breached.

 From the OSM FAQ page, some interesting and likely relevant sections 
(http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License#What_do_you_mean_by_.22Attribution.22.3F):

"How should I attribute you?

"Our requested attribution is "© OpenStreetMap contributors".
You must make it clear that the data is available under the Open 
Database Licence. This can be achieved by providing a "License" or 
"Terms" link which links to www.openstreetmap.org/copyright or 
www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl.
We ask that you hyperlink the attribution to www.openstreetmap.org where 
possible. Because OpenStreetMap is its contributors, you may omit the 
word "contributors" if space is limited.

"You may optionally qualify the credit to explain what OSM content you 
are using. For example, if you have rendered OSM data to your own 
design, you may wish to use "Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors".

"(If you are using map tiles supplied by us, you must also make it clear 
that the tiles are available under the Creative Commons 
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 licence. This may also be fulfilled by 
linking to www.openstreetmap.org/copyright.)"

...

"For a printed map, the credit should appear beside the map if that is 
where other such credits appear, and/or in the "acknowledgements" 
section of the publication (often at the start of a book or magazine)."

...

"In brief summary:

"If you correct or extend our data, you need to share your new data. If 
you make a map from our data, you may publish the map itself under any 
license you like, including commercial. You DO however, have to share 
the underlying data except that ...

You may also add separate and distinct layers to your map made from 
other sources of data. This data does not have to be shared, provided 
there is no interaction with the OpenStreetMap derived layer. For 
example, you cannot have a layer of restaurant icons that only appear if 
the same restaurant is not in OpenStreetMap!

"In more detail:"

...
"If you make a map from OpenStreetMap geodata and publish it, you may 
publish the map under any license you like. In ODbL parlance, this is 
known as a "Produced Work".

"However, if you have added to or enhanced our data in order to make the 
map, you must make those additions publicly available without charge. 
Also, anyone can extract the original data from the map, (such as 
latitude and longitudes, names of streets and places), without paying 
you or asking your permission.

"You can however, put separate and distinct data layers on top of your 
map, such as icons showing specialists points of interest, routes, track 
logs, shaded areas, contours and the like, then Share-Alike does not 
apply to these elements as long as they do not interact with the map 
underneath."

[quotes end]

The last section is the most eyebrow raising section for me. IANAL but 
my interpretation of the OSM licence (based upon experience of 
interpretation of licenses in my day job) means axismaps doesn't have a 
leg to stand on if OSM is their sole source of cartographic and 
topographical data.

Technically I believe they are in a corner -- however I propose a more 
gracious and mutually beneficical arrangement: someone appropriate from 
OSM contacts them, explains the situation and propose some form of 
remediation: a nonexclusive licence to distribute already-printed maps 
without on-page attribution; for all new print runs, the appropriate 
line(s) of attributive text, agreed by both parties; and a donation to 
OSM for every map sold, payable quarterly/six monthly/annually. An 
initial upfront donation wouldn't go amiss.

That they're based in the UK should make this easier to pursue.