3 ms·

It's a shame it's not become a bigger thing. I feel uptake has pretty much stagnated. The weird/pointless attribution requirement has really kneecaped them. A l

It's a shame it's not become a bigger thing. I feel uptake has pretty much stagnated. The weird/pointless attribution requirement has really kneecaped them. A lot of open government data can not be relicensed under a more restrictive license and can't be injested. And if you want to use their data it's also inherently problematic when you need to watermark every map that uses OSM data I hope some day a truely open data set is compiled - b/c honest I find the attribution requirement doesn't even serve the function of giving the authors/contributors any kudos

ygra 2y ago
Basically every service that provides maps requires attribution. The problem with OSM is that they cannot reasonably include other data with a license that also requires attribution at the usage site. That little »© OpenStreetMap contributors« in the corner would balloon into 600 different entries. Unless they all are fine with not being mentioned, but they typically do that not for free. There are a number of exceptions. A few CC-BY datasets can be used in OSM because the owner is fine with an entry on a Wiki page is sufficient attribution; Bing and Esri allow their aerial images to be used and only require the changeset to mention the source; etc. But each of those is a separate agreement.