On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 23:01, Kathleen Lu via talk <talk@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 _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk