[OSM-talk] Attribution guideline status update

Christoph Hormann osm at imagico.de
Fri Aug 9 19:11:42 UTC 2019


On Friday 09 August 2019, Kathleen Lu wrote:
> I disagree that there is no harm. [...]

Not sure if you noticed but my argument was the inherent asymmetry of 
the situation when creating a guideline with recommendations.  If there 
is harm like "hurt feelings" from erring on the side of caution in a 
guideline is completely beside the point.

The credibility point does decidedly *not* go both ways.  The OSMF is 
not a neutral intermediary, it has the obligation to represent the 
interests of the project and not those of outside data users.  As Nuno 
linked to the OSMF right now points out the reasons why we ask for 
attribution:

"We want you to attribute OpenStreetMap, i.e. you show users and viewers 
of whatever you do with our data clearly where you got the data from. A 
lot of contributors have spent and spend a lot of time and effort 
adding data from virtually every country in the world. We would also 
like people to know about our project and perhaps use or contribute 
data themselves."

It is completely acceptable and even expected that the OSMF asks for and 
encourages attribution of OSM beyond the minimum required by the 
license.  That this would result in the loss of trust from anyone seems 
ridiculous.

And by the way if i try to follow your line of reasoning: you 
interestingly did not mention the most significant harm resulting from 
potentially unneccessary requirements:  Lost profits.

Ein Schelm wer böses dabei denkt...

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/



More information about the talk mailing list