Lacking proper attribution wiki page - help with a review welcomed

Foundation
1

I am reviewing entries on Lacking proper attribution - OpenStreetMap Wiki

Many of them refer to pages which either have fixed attribution or where page is gone or not showing any maps anymore.

For example this edit updates info about http://maps.viaclaudia.org/nefos_app/frontend/page/viaclaudia/de?type=bike anymore - which apparently is not working anymore

If you want to help without interacting with OSM Wiki: please research whether http://www.breakingnews.com still is using OSM maps and where would be helpful and post in this thread (I quickly checked and old pages are gone, new seems to be without maps but a proper check before delisting them would be nice).

Direct editing requires OSM Wiki account and being able to edit tables, which is a certain barrier but not very high. And such help would be really helpful.

In all cases “Last checked” column can be updated once entry is checked and updated, and entries recently checked can be skipped for now.

Sometimes pages continues to use OSM data without proper attribution, so it should remain. In such case Lacking proper attribution/Example email - OpenStreetMap Wiki can be useful if someone wants to remind them about problem (update “Dates contacted” column in such case).

Some entries are about no longer existing websites: in such case “License ok”, “Authors ok” can be changed to “page defunct” or similar (and entry later will be archived, this can be also done).

If attribution is fully fixed it can be also edited to match entries with green Yes.

If in doubt, feel free to skip entry or ask here.

I am planning to review this entries but reviewing some entries takes quite a long time, so help would be welcomed.

Review of Lacking proper attribution/Fixed - OpenStreetMap Wiki (especially toward bottom, where there are several cases I reviewed recently) would be also appreciated, maybe I made some mistakes and given cases is not yet actually fixed.

(posted in this category as I will propose OSMF to act on specific cases of the most egregious cases, found some candidates for that already - but reviewing all entries would help further)

for avoidance of any doubt: I am speaking here for myself, not for OSM / OSMF / OSMF board

7 Likes
2

I strongly believe that Instagram’s “places” feature is currently using OSM data (since I can see my own contribution there), but I don’t see any attribution at all. Does this case count?

1000031467
1000031467720×1466 153 KB

The attribution format should not require individuals to interact with the map or produced work to see the attribution.

https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Attribution_Guidelines

3

is it appearing on tapping (i) image in bottom left? (if yes, then I believe it to be case of insufficient attribution violating ODBL as typical user will never tap this button while using map)

(I speak here for myself as a person, above is not an official statement)

4

Yes.

1000031469
1000031469720×1138 74.3 KB

1 Like
5

(if yes, then I believe it to be case of insufficient attribution violating ODBL as typical user will never tap this button while using map)

I agree that it looks as if it might be violating the attribution guidelines by the OpenStreetMap-Foundation. It would be interesting to hear the opinion of the board, and whether they are going to approach Meta Incorporated, asking them to fix it.

6

We did! Years ago, a Facebook/Meta rep told the OSMF Board that the OSMF would need to update the Attribution Guidelines. TBF they were ancient, predating smartphones! So the OSMF worked on, and updated, and adopted, new OSM Attribution Guidelines. FB/Meta’s attribution didn’t meet it. So FB/Meta admitted they don’t follow the OSMF advised Attribution Guidelines, but believe they are inside the legal requirements. This could be legally allowed. Interesting, they said the only thing that might change their actions now, is some legal preceden, or legal case. Probably (IMO) against someone else. I recommend against suing FB/Meta.

It’s possible this was all just bad faith stalling tactics (Everyone knows Facebook/Meta is completely untrustworthy), or perhaps someone higher up (who doesn’t care about OSM) overruled the OSM fans who work for FB/Meta.

(I was on the OSMF board from start 2020 → end of 2022)

3 Likes
7

new OSM Attribution Guidelines. FB/Meta’s attribution didn’t meet it. So FB/Meta admitted they don’t follow the OSMF advised Attribution Guidelines, but believe they are inside the legal requirements.

they are also listed as gold corporate members: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Corporate_Members

do we want such members who refuse to give appropriate attribution (as deemed by the community) and weasel around our guidelines?

Cheers Martin

7 Likes