[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update
Nuno Caldeira
nunocapelocaldeira at gmail.com
Fri Dec 27 21:59:30 UTC 2019
After i contacted the company ACCIONA MOBILITY they finally added
attribution on the app. and it's a new style, vertical. again plenty of
space for Mapbox logo. Maybe we should add vertical attribution on the
attribution guidance. check print here https://ibb.co/xLYrP3m
On 25/12/2019 19:17, Nuno Caldeira wrote:
> 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
> <mailto: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
> <mailto:talk-request at openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>
> Send talk mailing list submissions to
> talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto: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
> <mailto:talk-request at openstreetmap.org>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> talk-owner at openstreetmap.org <mailto: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
> <mailto:nunocapelocaldeira at gmail.com>>
> To: Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com
> <mailto:matkoniecz at tutanota.com>>
> Cc: joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com
> <mailto:joost.schouppe at gmail.com>>, OSMF Talk
> <osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>>, OpenStreetMap talk
> mailing list
> <talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk at openstreetmap.org>>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status
> update
> Message-ID: <ea8605f7-ac7d-040e-c38a-f80c2cbc8311 at gmail.com
> <mailto: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
> <mailto: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>
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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/20191227/af388892/attachment.html>
More information about the talk
mailing list