[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

Wed Dec 25 19:17:12 UTC 2019

doesn't surprise me. check this
https://docs.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl-js/example/attribution-position/ plenty
of space for visible attribution, well mapbox attribution is not hidden
under an "i". I have reported another client of theirs that I have reached
out to ask for attribution, which they understood, but still haven't fixed
it. let's see if mapbox is in good will.

On Wed, 25 Dec 2019, 17:20 · Michael Medina, <recycleoregon at gmail.com>
wrote:

> As a native English speaker this reads as complete stonewalling on
> Mapbox’s part. I don’t know why OSM doesn’t just file a DMCA complaint
> against Mapbox or deny them access. The OSM board should also not have to
> go through the regular help channel to get answers. Mapbox should escalate
> this issue to their top administrators.  I know the board likes to play
> nice, but Mapbox isn’t playing nice so no reason to as far as I can tell.
>
> Michael Medina
>
> On Wed, Dec 25, 2019 at 04:06 <talk-request at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> Send talk mailing list submissions to
>>         talk at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         talk-request at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         talk-owner at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of talk digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update
>>       (Nuno Caldeira)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 17:52:53 +0000
>> From: Nuno Caldeira <nunocapelocaldeira at gmail.com>
>> To: Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
>> Cc: joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>, OSMF Talk
>>         <osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>, OpenStreetMap talk mailing list
>>         <talk at openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status
>>         update
>> Message-ID: <ea8605f7-ac7d-040e-c38a-f80c2cbc8311 at gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>>
>> Hi Mateusz,
>>
>>
>> They don't. Here's all my email exchange with them from October 2018,
>> yes _*2018*_. it's more than enough with evidence and time to be fixed.
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/110XubCe0kd2HNtbqXS7U_vr44xyieaSt/view?usp=sharing
>>
>>
>> On 24/12/2019 07:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> > Have they responded with anything
>> > (except automatic reply) ?
>> >
>> > Is there an assigned issue id?
>> >
>> >
>> > 23 Dec 2019, 21:32 by nunocapelocaldeira at gmail.com:
>> >
>> >     I sent this situation to Mapbox 10 months ago.
>> >
>> >     On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 17:00 joost schouppe,
>> >     <joost.schouppe at gmail.com <mailto:joost.schouppe at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >             As an xmas bonus, here's another Facebook company (via
>> >             Mapbox), Snapchat that is using OSM without attribution
>> >             requirements (funnily there's plenty of space for a
>> >             reasonable and visible calculated mapbox logo and text).
>> >             They probably don't know, nor that they have been asked to
>> >             comply over a year ago, nor have agreed with the license
>> >             in every aspect of it when stated using OSM data, nor read
>> >             Mapbox TOS, or Mapbox been informed on these repeated
>> >             offenders, nor read the multiples reports in mailing
>> >             lists, nor that they had a employee that ran for OSMF board.
>> >
>> >             https://map.snapchat.com/
>> >
>> >             Let's continue to be hypocrites and pretend nothing is
>> >             going on for over a year with these two companies that are
>> >             corporate members of OSMF and should be the first ones to
>> >             give examples. Enough with excuses.
>> >
>> >
>> >         The Snapchat case is a pretty clear example of how not to do
>> >         things. If there's space for Mapbox, there's space for
>> >         OpenStreetMap. But I don't think Snapchat has anything to do
>> >         with Facebook.
>> >
>> >         Phil, I hope you contacted them directly and not through
>> Facebook.
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20191224/e4cbcf8f/attachment.htm
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of talk Digest, Vol 184, Issue 39
>> *************************************
>>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20191225/472c514c/attachment-0001.html>