> First, the text of the ODbL is explicit about “reasonably calculated” > awareness. FB believes its maps comply with this. The ODbL does not require > that “every” person see the attribution. It requires that “any” person can. > FB’s attribution to OSM is available to any viewer in a place that is > commonly associated with attribution. Not true. The button is barely visible and only those really looking for attribution will be able to spot the button, and even then it's very easy to miss the button.
> I don’t want to repeat myself too much, but the ODbL is very terse and > leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Uhh, except not? It leaves a lot of room for interpretation because corporate users want to read imaginary text between the lines. The ODbL license text is crystal clear that the attribution should be somewhere visible, and hiding under interaction of a nearly-hidden button is not visible. > Common practices for data attribution in map and non-map domains rely on > click-through interactions like the ones FB uses. This image shows otherwise[0] > and that the words in the corner of a map are relevant to how that basemap > was produced and not (for example) the location of a friend or venue overlaid > on top of it. I would agree with you if FB and Mapbox (another corporate user that doesn't attribute OSM correctly) used OSM data solely for displaying POIs, which isn't the case. > My interest as a board member is in maintaining this open approach to uses > that are bigger, weirder, more niche, or otherwise different than OSM might > have previously imagined. By undermining attribution of a big, open and free dataset, it would only please corporate users. > but in general it’s much more likely that FB and other companies’ need for a > high-quality, free, global map with a healthy org behind it is *strongly > aligned* with OSMF’s interests. Nope. The corporate users want a free database, so they don't have to pay a single cent of royalties to who produced the database. They want to use something free and open, but don't want to credit it. They want to change attribution guidelines so they don't have to worry about potential lawsuits that may follow. I really don't understand how hard is it to add a text on the corner of the map including the words "(c) OpenStreetMap contributors" and linking to the project. You're not paying and once you add attribution you shouldn't worry about it anymore. Why do corporate users have to make things so hard? Corporate users have succeeded in pushing their agenda in the working group writing the attribution guidelines draft. Just take a look, there are so many examples accepted by the WG that go against what's written in the ODbL (splash screen being one of them)[1]. [0] https://www.systemed.net/osm/attribution.png [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Attribution_Guideline/2020v2 _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
