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

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Sun Sep 8 15:51:03 UTC 2019


BTW a potential tweak to the wording (caveat: not discussed with
anybody) that would perhaps make the multiple data sources scenario work
a bit better is to change the current

/If OpenStreetMap data accounts for a minority (less than 50%) part of
the visible map rendering, attribution with other sources on a separate
page that is visible after user interaction is acceptable. /

//

to

//

/If OpenStreetMap is not the largest data provider for the visible map
rendering, attribution with other sources on a separate page that is
visible after user interaction is acceptable./

Which would require on map attribution not only for the 50% and more
case, but also for any case in which the majority of the visible data is
from OSM. It does break down a bit when there are numerous small data
sources of very similar size. Naturally one can argue about what
"largest" means in the context which however applies to the suggested
50% rule too.

Simon

Am 08.09.2019 um 16:38 schrieb Simon Poole:
>
> I don't quite follow your argument here. According to the draft
> guideline if a majority of the data displayed is derived from OSM,
> then attribution needs to be displayed on map. So assuming that the
> prerequisite is met, as you are saying, the draft guideline would
> require exactly what you want.
>
> The -other- problem with the site is that it is implying a partnership
> which doesn't exist. Something which we clearly don't want for
> commercial law and liability reasons, given the wording of the ODbL I
> doubt that we can base such a requirement on the licence (but likely
> on use of our trademarks).
>
> Simon
>
> Am 08.09.2019 um 12:11 schrieb Nuno Caldeira:
>>
>> Here's another example of why we should not adopt the multiple
>> sources attribution omission of our attribution. They list us as
>> partners (?)
>> https://www.wrld3d.com/3d-maps/custom-maps
>> Use multiple sources and are not complying with ODbL by not showing
>> the license.
>> Seen multiple maps by their clients and they show data "copyright l.map"
>>
>> I have confirmed with multiple contributors that largely the data
>> used is OSM and it's around a year old dump of the planet.
>>
>> Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch <mailto:simon at poole.ch>> escreveu em sex,
>> 9/08/2019 às 08:45 :
>>
>>     As we've mentioned multiple times over the last months, the LWG
>>     decided
>>     last year to consolidate all attribution guidance in to one
>>     document and
>>     address some of the use cases that have become common over the last 7
>>     years that previously had none. Particularly in the light of the
>>     parallel discussions about attribution on larger social media
>>     platforms
>>     we need to make up our minds what we actually want, and define
>>     concrete
>>     minimum requirements for acceptable attribution. To not do this just
>>     provides the excuse of pointing to the cacophony of voices all saying
>>     something different. 
>>
>>     We've been working on and off on the document for a while, and
>>     are now
>>     largely finished. Going forward we intend to wikify the document and
>>     make it available for public comment together with a BoF session
>>     at SotM
>>     next month (which probably means that we'll have to appropriate a
>>     coffee
>>     break). You can have a glimpse at the text here
>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e_IQYHtqVivGRw4O4EOn6__-LGMuzPlWz6XKEdAkwW0/edit?usp=sharing
>>     the few things that are not nailed down belong to those that we would
>>     appreciate feedback on.
>>
>>     Simon
>>
>>     PS: the number of coffee breaks permitting we might want to
>>     appropriate
>>     another one for the discussion of a tile licence change.
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     osmf-talk mailing list
>>     osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190908/7b449a93/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20190908/7b449a93/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the talk mailing list