[OSM-talk] Please review "Community attribution advice” wiki page

Rory McCann rory at technomancy.org
Tue Dec 8 17:36:43 UTC 2020


Yes, fundamentally, you're 100% correct. The ODbL licence is the thing that matters when it comes to what's legally required. And that says nothing about “device independent pixels” or “javascript popup clicks”, it only refers to the mental state of someone.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on data protection (Art. 8) is only about 80 words long  (DE 73, EN 82, GA 101), but the GDPR that implements it is 55,000 words long. I view the ODbL as like our “constitution” for what you can do with the data. It will be short, but for practical real word answers you need laws & court cases which expand on it. One can always challenge a law for violating a constituation limit or requirement, and it should be the same with the ODbL & the OSMF's Attribution Guidelines.

So I think there's a lot of benefit in writing out, in my more detail, how you can follow §4.3, rather than speaking in generalities.

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, at 00:08, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> 
> 
> > Rory McCann <rory at technomancy.org> hat am 07.12.2020 22:57 geschrieben:
> > 
> > But I think this attribution is too vague. It's advice seems to restate the relevant section from the ODbL. There are many examples of poor attribution where someone could argue that they meet this standard.
> 
> As i have already explained to you in
> 
> http://blog.imagico.de/the-osmf-changes-during-the-past-year-and-what-they-mean-for-the-coming-years-part-2/#comment-141145
> 
> the opposite is the case - the advise as formulated precisely explains 
> the criterion for valid attribution.
> 
> Attribution has the purpose to be perceived by humans.  To determine if 
> a certain form of attribution is acceptable you have to look at the 
> effect it has on human perception while interacting with the produced 
> work.
> 
> It is understandable that to people with a primarily technical 
> background this very concept appears uncomfortable and hard to grasp 
> and their reflex is to substitute this with something purely technical 
> where you can essentially program a test to verify if the attribution 
> is OK independent of the human user.  That cannot work.   
> 
> -- 
> Christoph Hormann 
> http://www.imagico.de/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



More information about the talk mailing list