[OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL

Yves yvecai at mailbox.org
Mon Jun 10 20:13:07 UTC 2019


I had to read the 2013 (wow!) thread again. '(c)OSM' on small devices would have legal issues as well, I guess, but maybe not as many.
Anyway, speaking of legal issues, I don't think this is like if we ever took a lot of legal actions concerning attribution...
Yves 

Le 10 juin 2019 21:56:14 GMT+02:00, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> a écrit :
>
>Am 10.06.2019 um 21:05 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier:
>> On 6/10/19 5:28 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:47 PM Yves <yvecai at mailbox.org
>>> <mailto:yvecai at mailbox.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     I think a small '(c)OSM' for small screen web or app could be
>>>     suggested as OK, what do you think?
>>>
>>>
>>> Why not revive this dormant proposal for a small attribution logo
>>> that was proposed 6 years
>>> ago:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RFC_Attribution_Mark
>>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RFC_Attribution_Mark>
>> I have always wondered why it did not get more attention... 
>
>Because of legal issues with both the proposed logo and using it as a
>replacement for "OpenStreetMap" for attribution purposes that have been
>mentioned more than once (it should be noted by the way that neither
>the
>goog or Mapbox use anything else than their full name for attribution).
>
>Simon
>
>> But I'm not the target audience. So, do we have feedback from web
>> designers - the population who this proposal aims to convince to
>> attribute properly ?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20190610/71cbb1b3/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the talk mailing list