3 ms·

an interesting example where this has been problematic is OpenStreetMap. They can't ingest a lot of government data b/c their project requires a relicense with

by geokon 2y ago

an interesting example where this has been problematic is OpenStreetMap. They can't ingest a lot of government data b/c their project requires a relicense with their attribution-requirement (where all users are forced to have an ugly OSM bumper sticker on their maps)

pastage 2y ago
FWIW attribution does not have to be big nor on the map, it is just less work to use the default than putting it elsewhere.
stereo 2y ago
What you call an ugly bumper sticker is credit where it is due, but also an important recruitment mechanism for new mappers, which improves the map. The /copyright page is our biggest landing page on the website, even above the base / page. Attribution is also a requirement of many proprietary map providers.
- geokon 2y ago
  yes, I've misclicked the hidden link many times as well The credit is due to the volunteers or governments that created the data, and not the project that collates it (their names are not displayed). The logic behind wikipedia doesn't translate to OSM b/c OSM is providing data to be reused If this requirement wasn't there in the first place then OSM maps would have been the default go-to map and a household name like wikipedia. You wouldn't need to force an ad in every map to self-promote. > Attribution is also a requirement of many proprietary map providers the project had the opportunity to do something truly different and unique and chose not to... what a missed opportunity.
  - cormorant 2y ago
    I'm genuinely curious why this is a sore spot for you, since I've never heard this perspective. It seems like you see the key difference as being that the OSM attribution is commonly clickable, whereas the Google Maps one is not (similar font/placement). (Actually Google Maps does have "Terms" clickable. Random example of website embedding it: https://www.belcourt.org/directions-and-map/ https://www.belcourt.org/directions-and-map/ or see https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/embed/get-started https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/embed/get-s...) Meanwhile OSM says that you may "fade/collapse the attribution ... automatically on map interaction" among other possibilities (https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Attribution_Guidelines#Interactive_maps https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Attribution_Guideline...). It being licensed the way it is, you can use Leaflet.js or whatever else instead of the copy they host, if you really don't like their iframe...
    - geokon 2y ago
      I don't use Google maps, so I'm honestly not really sure what their terms are I guess in the big picture it just rubs me the wrong way a bit. I just find it mildly absurd that if I take a screenshot of OSMand on my phone and send it to a friend, that I've broken the law. It'd like to live in a world where that's not the case. It's like if Project Gutenburg mandated everyone had to include a cover page with their name on every book they distribute. It doesn't make it unusable or horrible, but it's just a general feeling "ah, so close but they missed the mark". It could have been a truly open repository of data and instead it's just so slightly not that (and in a way that's so minor that no one will ever bother to re-make a truly no-strings-attached version :) )
      - jumelles 2y ago
        > if I take a screenshot of OSMand on my phone and send it to a friend, that I've broken the law I'm not sure what exactly you're misunderstanding but this is not how the law works.
habi 2y ago
> ugly OSM bumper sticker on their maps Displaying attribution for free worldwide geodata sounds quite good for me.
cormorant 2y ago
Wait, what? If the government source is public domain, OSM (or anyone else) can take it and derive from it and can then impose whatever license OSM wants, including an attribution requirement. Did you mean the other way around? Actually OSM's license is so weak on the attribution it requires, that OSM does not ingest CC-BY data, because OSM believes their further distribution would not satisfy CC-BY's attribution requirement. https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_Compatibility https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_Compatibility
- geokon 2y ago
  The parent comment was talking about wanting a system where "Any derived works, commercial or otherwise should also be in the public domain" so I was talking to that. I assume when you say "government" you mean the US government. But in other countries it often doesn't work that way. You can't redistribute government maps with more restrictions. I went to a talk about this from an OSM developer here in Taiwan. OSM tries to lobby for the maps to be redistributed under different terms so they can ingest them

by geokon 2y ago

pastage 2y ago

FWIW attribution does not have to be big nor on the map, it is just less work to use the default than putting it elsewhere.

stereo 2y ago

What you call an ugly bumper sticker is credit where it is due, but also an important recruitment mechanism for new mappers, which improves the map. The /copyright page is our biggest landing page on the website, even above the base / page. Attribution is also a requirement of many proprietary map providers.

geokon 2y ago
yes, I've misclicked the hidden link many times as well The credit is due to the volunteers or governments that created the data, and not the project that collates it (their names are not displayed). The logic behind wikipedia doesn't translate to OSM b/c OSM is providing data to be reused If this requirement wasn't there in the first place then OSM maps would have been the default go-to map and a household name like wikipedia. You wouldn't need to force an ad in every map to self-promote. > Attribution is also a requirement of many proprietary map providers the project had the opportunity to do something truly different and unique and chose not to... what a missed opportunity.
- cormorant 2y ago
  I'm genuinely curious why this is a sore spot for you, since I've never heard this perspective. It seems like you see the key difference as being that the OSM attribution is commonly clickable, whereas the Google Maps one is not (similar font/placement). (Actually Google Maps does have "Terms" clickable. Random example of website embedding it: https://www.belcourt.org/directions-and-map/ https://www.belcourt.org/directions-and-map/ or see https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/embed/get-started https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/embed/get-s...) Meanwhile OSM says that you may "fade/collapse the attribution ... automatically on map interaction" among other possibilities (https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Attribution_Guidelines#Interactive_maps https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Attribution_Guideline...). It being licensed the way it is, you can use Leaflet.js or whatever else instead of the copy they host, if you really don't like their iframe...
  - geokon 2y ago
    I don't use Google maps, so I'm honestly not really sure what their terms are I guess in the big picture it just rubs me the wrong way a bit. I just find it mildly absurd that if I take a screenshot of OSMand on my phone and send it to a friend, that I've broken the law. It'd like to live in a world where that's not the case. It's like if Project Gutenburg mandated everyone had to include a cover page with their name on every book they distribute. It doesn't make it unusable or horrible, but it's just a general feeling "ah, so close but they missed the mark". It could have been a truly open repository of data and instead it's just so slightly not that (and in a way that's so minor that no one will ever bother to re-make a truly no-strings-attached version :) )
    - jumelles 2y ago
      > if I take a screenshot of OSMand on my phone and send it to a friend, that I've broken the law I'm not sure what exactly you're misunderstanding but this is not how the law works.

habi 2y ago

> ugly OSM bumper sticker on their maps Displaying attribution for free worldwide geodata sounds quite good for me.

cormorant 2y ago

Wait, what? If the government source is public domain, OSM (or anyone else) can take it and derive from it and can then impose whatever license OSM wants, including an attribution requirement. Did you mean the other way around? Actually OSM's license is so weak on the attribution it requires, that OSM does not ingest CC-BY data, because OSM believes their further distribution would not satisfy CC-BY's attribution requirement. https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_Compatibility https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_Compatibility

geokon 2y ago
The parent comment was talking about wanting a system where "Any derived works, commercial or otherwise should also be in the public domain" so I was talking to that. I assume when you say "government" you mean the US government. But in other countries it often doesn't work that way. You can't redistribute government maps with more restrictions. I went to a talk about this from an OSM developer here in Taiwan. OSM tries to lobby for the maps to be redistributed under different terms so they can ingest them