[OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 23:01, Kathleen Lu via talk
<talk at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> OSM has imported sources that are ODbL. The attribution to those sources does not appear on the map, but rather after several clicks (usually first to the copyright page, then the contributors page). If that's not acceptable under ODbL for a map that has multiple data sources, then OSM would be violating others' ODbL licenses.

In clause 4.3, the ODbL explicitly does not actually require any
copyright notices (which I guess includes attribution statements) on
produced works. Instead the notice that must be included (reasonably
calculated to ensure that everyone viewing the produced work aware of
it) is to say that the work has been made using an ODbL database, with
details of how it can be obtained. So in this sense OSM is failing to
comply with the ODbL on the main map, but it's not through lack of
attribution of sources.

What we actually *need* to include on the map is a mention of the
"OpenStreetMap" database, that the data is available under the ODbL,
and a link to where it can be obtained. I'd suggest we should be using
something like "Map data (c) OpenStreetMap, ODbL." Downstream users of
OSM need to do the same (or equivalently reference their own
ODbL-or-equivalent-licensed Derivative Database). This text on
produced works cannot be hidden behind other links.

(Presumably, the way the ODbL was envisaged working with produced
works, is that people viewing them are made away that that underlying
data is re-usable and how to get hold of it. The copyright notices,
attribution etc. then must be delivered if/when they try to access the
raw data.)

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker