[OSM-talk] #AttributionIsNotOptional experiment on OSM France tile servers

Wed Mar 11 15:17:49 UTC 2020

Hi Simon,

In a volunteer community, fun things are more likely to happen at all. So I
do think the idea is worth exploring, even if the current implementation
might be risky to OSMfr or to OSMF if implemented without much further
thought.

I would personally be interested in a more in depth analysis from you. I
personally don't see how a more neutral message ("This map is based on
OpenStreetMap data. Please add the required attribution to your website.
Contact us at X if you need help.") would be more defacing or likely to
lead to a liability claim than just a blacked out map, but I would not mind
at all to be enlightened.

Joost

Op wo 11 mrt. 2020 om 15:39 schreef Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>:

> As I wrote (conveniently ignored in the noise of the vigilante rampage):
> "The safe, I admit also the less fun, option, is to simply block access
> after giving any required notice."
>
> Simon
> Am 11.03.2020 um 14:49 schrieb joost schouppe:
>
> Simon,
>
> I guess with small overlap you mean it's only about people who use osm.org
> tiles, not people who use other services?
> While that is true, the double whammy of both heavily using resources and
> also not attributing does seem like a good subgroup to start with some
> measures.
>
> In the case of the OSM.org tiles, I suppose this is regulated by
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use . At first glance I
> didn't see anything providing people who do not respect those terms. Am I
> missing something, or is this a naive approach to the problem?
> Even if the ToU's could be lacking in detail, couldn't we simply change
> them? The final section talks about changes, which we seem to be able to
> just do when we want to.
>
> I would think the biggest challenge on OSMF side would be the workload for
> OWG/sysadmins.
>
> Best,
> Joost
>
> Op zo 8 mrt. 2020 om 12:18 schreef Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>:
>
>> Just for the record:
>>
>> Enforcing attribution for services that you are providing directly (aka
>> tiles in some form) only has a small overlap with the goals of the
>> attribution guideline, and the avenues open to you depend on your ToUs /
>> contracts with your users and the legal situation in the countries you are
>> providing the service in.
>>
>> I would be very very wary of doing anything that deliberately defaces a
>> web site without consulting with a local (to the country the web site is
>> in) lawyer, particularly if the message implies wrong doing. The safe, I
>> admit also the less fun, option, is to simply block access after giving any
>> required notice.
>>
>> Simon
>> Am 08.03.2020 um 11:04 schrieb Yves:
>>
>> This looks at first as a nuisance that could be perceived as a bad move,
>> but the feedback you're receiving rather prove the contrary.
>> Well done!
>> Ps: would you share your nginx partial redirect, I may consider it for
>> Opensnowmap tiles policy?
>>
>> Le 8 mars 2020 10:14:58 GMT+01:00, Christian Quest
>> <cquest at openstreetmap.fr> <cquest at openstreetmap.fr> a écrit :
>>>
>>> Here is a hort report on this experiment...
>>>
>>> I started a week ago by searching OSM France tile server logs for
>>> referer and checked manually if the map on the refering page was correctly
>>> attributed.
>>>
>>> This allowed me to create a short list of 20 entries of sites using the
>>> french styled tiles and the humanitarian tiles (yes, it is made by OSM
>>> France).
>>>
>>>
>>> I then modified our nginx based proxy_cache configuration, to redirect
>>> some tiles to an "attribution tile" only for the domain in the list.
>>>
>>> For two of them, I tweeted about it... the most visible one is the
>>> moroco yellow page service, generating a little less than a million daily
>>> tile requests on our servers.
>>>
>>> https://twitter.com/cq94/status/1234516075695525888
>>>
>>> In less than 24 hours, the attribution appeared and I removed them from
>>> the list.
>>>
>>> https://twitter.com/cq94/status/1234779931537739776
>>>
>>>
>>> Then I included an email address in the attribution reminder tile... and
>>> got emails back within a few hours.
>>>
>>> Some were asking how to do the attribution, others telling me the
>>> attribution was now ok and asking how to remove the reminder tiles.
>>>
>>> In my answers, I also remind that our tile service made by volunteers on
>>> donated hardware is not unlimited and inviting them to have a look at
>>> switch2osm to setup their own tile server or use a commercial provider.
>>>
>>> Up to now, nobody complained :)
>>>
>>>
>>> Yesterday, I've started automating attribution checking using selenium.
>>> For each referer, a python script loads the page, searches for tiles, then
>>> looks for attribution text or link. The result is stored in a postgresql
>>> database which allows to group referers by url, hostname and ip.
>>>
>>> The attribution percentage I currently see is around 70-80% which is not
>>> that bad.
>>>
>>> My next major step is to use the same technique to remind about tile
>>> usage policy...
>>>
>>>
>>> To do something similar on osm.org, a first step is to extract referers
>>> from the cache logs, then use the automated attribution check to evaluate
>>> the situation.
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 08/03/2020 à 01:52, Nuno Caldeira a écrit :
>>>
>>> That would be a good option for those that use third party providers of
>>> OSM. But to be honest, from my experience I highly doubt that even
>>> corporate members of OSMF, like Mapbox would do it, when their client
>>> Facebook (also corporate member of OSMF) after one year and half, still has
>>> maps with lack of attribution or attributed to HERE, when it's clearly OSM.
>>>
>>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2020, 00:46 Phil Wyatt, <phil at wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am sure others may have seen this 'blacklist' implementation for
>>>> showing a reminder about attribution.
>>>>
>>>> https://twitter.com/cq94/status/1234528717604577282
>>>>
>>>> Worthy of consideration for openstreetmap.org?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers - Phil
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing listtalk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
> <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
>
>

-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
<http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20200311/32a08a35/attachment-0001.htm>