> Just a reminder, this thread started of with a discussion of attribution, or rather lack of such
Doesn't help that the original post conflates the issues :p On Tuesday, April 29, 2014, Simon Poole <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Just a reminder, this thread started of with a discussion of > attribution, or rather lack of such. I don't think there is very much > doubt about what the licence requires even given all the complexity of > the ODbL, for a produced work it is: > > "However, if you Publicly Use a Produced Work, You must include a notice > associated with the Produced Work reasonably calculated to make any > Person that uses, views, accesses, interacts with, or is otherwise > exposed to the Produced Work aware that Content was obtained from the > Database," > > Our suggested attribution text is already very minimal. It is not clear > to me what reasonable objections exist against simply attributing OSM as > we require. > > Simon > >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
