[OSM-talk] a license violation?

[Christopher Woods (IWD)]

On 02/01/2013 15:20, Richard Weait wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Tobias Knerr <osm at tobias-knerr.de 
> <mailto:osm at tobias-knerr.de>> wrote:
>
>     Am 02.01.2013 11:41, Robin Paulson wrote:
>     > http://store.axismaps.com/product/boston-blue
>     >
>     > osm is mentioned on the web site, but not on the poster itself.
>     >
>     > suggestions, comments, etc. requested please.
>
>     I'm assuming that they only sell these posters though their site? In
>     that case, it is not a license violation if the site properly
>     attributes
>     OSM.*
>
>     If their customer then publicly displays or re-distributes these
>     posters
>     without informing the viewer/recipient about the source, the customer
>     would indeed be committing a license violation - but for that we
>     cannot
>     technically blame the original vendor.
>
>     Tobias
>
>     * I'm ignoring the missing link to the license for now.
>
>
> Axis Maps spoke with LWG some time ago.  You can probably find them in 
> the archives on this list as well.  Attribution on the map looks 
> great, presuming that they made the map from pre-change data.  They 
> also mention OSM on the site.  Both of those aspects seem good.
>
> Has anybody contacted them to find out if the data and maps are older 
> or newer?  If one was concerned about this issue, after seeing the 
> attribution on the map, one could drop a note to 
> legal at osmfoundation.org <mailto:legal at osmfoundation.org> and LWG will 
> put it on their list for the next LWG meeting.
>
> Tobias' suggestion that I could not hang this poster in my home unless 
> I tell every visitor about the data license seems to over reach what 
> is required by normal copyright.  I don't have to tell you that my 
> Picasso is a Picasso* when you come over for Mappy Hour.
>
> We are talking about a printed poster here, right?  If I bought one 
> then made and sold copies, I suspect that Axis Maps would have issues 
> with me copying without permission, just as the author of a book might 
> not like me copying and reselling their book.  But if I were to copy 
> and resell it, with the OSM attribution on it, I can't see a 
> reasonable data-license-violation there.
>
Well, at least it looks like there is an attribution (at least from the 
bigcartel cropped image linked earlier in this thread) but it's so small 
so as to pretty much be invisible. More importantly, whilst it's 
following the letter, it's not following the spirit of the rule.

Is there no requirement that the attribution has to be visible (or 
clearly indicated), or at least a similar size to the other body copy? 
Having it overlaid on graphics in a tiny point size is a little 
disingenuous.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130102/243e439b/attachment.html>