[OSM-talk] We need to have a conversation about attribution

James james2432 at gmail.com
Tue Jul 23 22:48:35 UTC 2019

It's kind of funny when people deny osm data as it has it's own sort
flavour that differentiates it from google, bing, here, etc. It's instantly

On Tue., Jul. 23, 2019, 6:43 p.m. Nuno Caldeira, <
nunocapelocaldeira at gmail.com> wrote:

> Months go by nothing happens. here's another example from LiveStream, a
> Vimeo service.They have a map (example, press "i"
> https://livestream.com/accounts/23202872/events/7200883 ) , asked to add
> the attribution, they replied they do not use OSM tiles or data, which i
> kindly asked how they had my contributions on their map. They stopped
> replying, short after saying they would investigate.
> Guess what tiles they are using? Mapbox. Screenshot
> https://i.ibb.co/0njPFyy/ssdasd.jpg
> Does OSMF need these corporates member that keep acting like this? Who are
> the first not complying with what the community wanted when we switched
> from CC to ODbL? Still the board hasn't replied to my request to terminate
> Facebook license
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2019-June/082653.html
> Funnily, Facebook shared this today
> https://tech.fb.com/ai-is-supercharging-the-creation-of-maps-around-the-world/
> As a reminder of OSMF articles
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association
> 3. The Foundation is established for the purposes listed below:
> (1) encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free
> geospatial data; and (2) providing geospatial data for anybody to use and
> share.
> Are these companies encouraging the use, the growth and distribution of
> OSM, by repeatedly and after being asked several times to show the
> attribution?
> Do we need to ask the board to expel those corporate members (equivalent
> to associate member)?
> 18. The board may only resolve to expel a person as member or associate
> member if, in the board's reasonable opinion, that person's conduct
> interferes or is likely to interfere with the Foundation *achieving one
> or more of its objects*.
> Who's in need more of who? OpenStreetMap or these companies? this is not
> acceptable and OSMF needs to act as companies, their clients clearly do not
> care when contributors contact them asking to comply. This is a snowball
> going downhill with more and more companies doing what facebook does and
> not attribution and stop replying to the contributors request to add the
> attribution. Guess we or OSMF is too soft on this.
> When we switch this was plain and explicit:
> *Both licenses are “By Attribution”* and “Share Alike”.
> Can I trust the OpenStreetMap Foundation ?
> The Foundation is "dedicated to encouraging the growth, development and
> distribution of free geospatial data and to providing geospatial data for
> anybody to use and share.", ( http://www.osmfoundation.org ).
> But what happens if the Foundation is taken over by people with commercial
> interests?
>    - You still own the rights to any data you contribute, not the
>    Foundation. In the new Contributor Terms, you license the Foundation to
>    publish the data for others to use and ONLY under a free and open license.
>    - The Foundation is not allowed to take your contribution and release
>    it under a commercial license.
>    - If the Foundation fails to publish under only a free and open
>    license, it has broken its contract with you. A copy of the existing data
>    can be made and released by a different body.
>    - If a change is made to another free and open license, it is active
>    contributors who decide yes or no, not the Foundation.
> from
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Historic/We_Are_Changing_The_License#What_are_the_main_differences_between_the_old_and_the_new_license.3F
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190723/fdbae774/attachment.html>

More information about the talk mailing list