[OSM-talk] Attribution guideline status update

Tobias Knerr osm at tobias-knerr.de
Fri Aug 9 16:30:11 UTC 2019

Thank you for your work! I believe that clearly documenting our
expectations is a very important step towards solving the current
problems surrounding attribution. It will help well-intentioned data
users to avoid accidentally messing up OSM attribution, and it leaves
fewer excuses for the less well-intentioned ones – making it easier for
us to put pressure on them to improve their practices.

I do have a couple of questions/comments about the current draft:

* Can you confirm that the current attribution practices on Wikipedia
and many similar projects would be covered by the "small images" case?

* I believe video games/simulations should be given similar treatment as
fictional movie productions by permitting attribution in the credits as
an alternative to the current options. Not allowing this seems to
contradict the larger "in a location where customarily attribution would
be expected" principle, as rolling credits are customary for many gaming
genres. (I'm mostly thinking of traditional PC or console games here,
not so much of mobile apps.)

* What's the guidance on scenarios where software does not ship with OSM
data, and does not display online maps, but e.g. allows downloading map
data for offline use? Would it be acceptable to make the license
information part of the download process, or is it still required that
attribution is visible on-screen during use?


More information about the talk mailing list