Re: [OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL (Andy Mabbett )

[Simon Poole]

The ODbL (like for example the CC licences too) does not allow
sub-licencing and stipulates that every licensee is licensed directly by
the OSMF.

Am 13.06.2019 um 19:10 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:17 PM Nuno Caldeira
> mailto:nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> [...] OSMF is the licensor [...]
>
>
> Well, if we really want to be strict about it, AFAIK, Facebook did not
> get their map data directly from OSMF but rather through Mapbox.
> Mapbox got their data directly from OSMF and are re-releasing their
> OSM derivative database and produced works as vector tiles and static
> map images via their APIs and SDKs. This would mean that it is the
> responsibility of Mapbox to notify Facebook that FB is not in
> compliance with the ODbL.
>
> However, I really think it would be interesting to see if OSMF
> bypassing Mapbox and directly contacting one of Mapbox's clients is a
> valid legal avenue to pursue attribution violations.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL (Andy Mabbett )

[Nuno Caldeira]

Eugene I already pointed that to Mapbox that some of their clients are not
complying with ODbL and even their terms of service. They didn't reply
either.
Mapbox TOS https://docs.mapbox.com/help/how-mapbox-works/attribution/

Text attribution

The text attribution contains at least three links: © Mapbox, ©
OpenStreetMap and Improve this map. This attribution is strictly required
when using the Mapbox Streets tileset due to OpenStreetMap's data source
ODbL license. Some other Mapbox-provided tilesets require additional
attribution which is stored in the TileJSON of the tileset.
When do you have to provide attribution?

Maps using Mapbox map designs or data supplied by Mapbox must display both
the Mapbox wordmark and text attribution. This includes:

Maps using a Mapbox template style such as Mapbox Streets, Mapbox
Outdoors or Mapbox Light, or a style derived from those styles.
Maps using a Mapbox tileset, such as Mapbox Streets, Mapbox Terrain,
and Mapbox Satellite.

You must also display the Mapbox wordmark if your map uses a custom style
or custom data hosted by Mapbox. (This is the case for most maps built with
Mapbox Studio.) If you do not use Mapbox designs or data supplied by
Mapbox, you may omit text attribution.

If your map does not use Mapbox designs, data, hosting, or other Mapbox
APIs, Mapbox does not require you to provide attribution in either form.



A quinta, 13/06/2019, 18:10, Eugene Alvin Villar 
escreveu:

> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:17 PM Nuno Caldeira <
> nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> [...] OSMF is the licensor [...]
>>
>
> Well, if we really want to be strict about it, AFAIK, Facebook did not get
> their map data directly from OSMF but rather through Mapbox. Mapbox got
> their data directly from OSMF and are re-releasing their OSM derivative
> database and produced works as vector tiles and static map images via their
> APIs and SDKs. This would mean that it is the responsibility of Mapbox to
> notify Facebook that FB is not in compliance with the ODbL.
>
> However, I really think it would be interesting to see if OSMF bypassing
> Mapbox and directly contacting one of Mapbox's clients is a valid legal
> avenue to pursue attribution violations.
>
>
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL (Andy Mabbett )

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:17 PM Nuno Caldeira 
wrote:

> [...] OSMF is the licensor [...]
>

Well, if we really want to be strict about it, AFAIK, Facebook did not get
their map data directly from OSMF but rather through Mapbox. Mapbox got
their data directly from OSMF and are re-releasing their OSM derivative
database and produced works as vector tiles and static map images via their
APIs and SDKs. This would mean that it is the responsibility of Mapbox to
notify Facebook that FB is not in compliance with the ODbL.

However, I really think it would be interesting to see if OSMF bypassing
Mapbox and directly contacting one of Mapbox's clients is a valid legal
avenue to pursue attribution violations.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL (Andy Mabbett )

[Nuno Caldeira]

Martin, i obviously agree about the usage of usage data, that's the point
of OpenStreetMap. Makes me proud to see it being used more and more as an
alternative of Google. But the license has requirements that must be
fulfill.

I know they are already in breach, however as pointed on 9.4 c), the
licensor (OSMF) must notify them to be considered permanetly terminated.
they are not complying with the license neither with the guidelines that
OSMF have set and made public. When we adopted ODbL, im sure 9.4 c) was
evaluated,despite you mentioning its not OSMF duty to pursue license
violations, however OSMF is the licensor and ODbL mentions the Licensor can
permanently terminate the license. As I, as a contributor have requested
multiple times, pointed out the copyright page, the license and the
guidelines as they keep ignoring, this is the only solution for them to
have their license permanetly terminated, unless they comply in 30 days
after being notified.

A quarta, 12/06/2019, 12:02, Martin Koppenhoefer 
escreveu:

> sent from a phone
>
> > On 9. Jun 2019, at 15:45, Nuno Caldeira 
> wrote:
> >.
> > As mentioned on the blog, i already asked facebook several times to
> comply. They stopped replying. I'm not expecting a reply, i'm just sharing
> this on the mailing list.
>
>
> I guess you are expecting a reply from the OpenStreetMap-Foundation
> board of directors or them publicly taking a position? Because this is
> the n+1th time that unsatisfactory attribution (or completely missing
> in the case of mini maps) by Facebook is raised here, and AFAIR there
> was never an official statement by the board (members of the board may
> have replied individually and with personal statements). I would
> really welcome a clear statement from board, or at least one that
> explains that board members have different opinions on this, or why it
> takes them so long to say anything about it.
>
> People have contributed to OSM under the Contributor Terms, where OSMF
> acknowledged they would only distribute the data under the ODbL or
> another free and open license chosen by the active contributors. Not
> pursuing license violations (and not even attempting to do anything
> against it) is against the spirit of the whole license idea and raises
> questions about the validity of the Contributor Terms agreement.
>
> As you have cited, for the abusers the situation is defined in the
> license text, "9.0 Termination of Your rights under this License", and
> by using the OSM data without attribution (as confirmed also by
> Facebook in the email you have shared), their license is already
> terminated, no notification necessary ("9.1 Any breach by You of the
> terms and conditions of this License automatically terminates this
> License with immediate effect and without notice to You.").
> On the other hand, I believe most of us are not interested in
> terminating the use of our data by them, we are happy for everyone
> using it, it is the purpose of the project to create useful data. What
> we want is simply the required attribution. Noone can use a
> substantial part of the db without giving attribution.
>
> In some way it is also in the interest of any of our data users that
> there is attribution to OSM, because if the OSM community grows, it
> will result in more accurate and up to date map data.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL (Andy Mabbett )

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 9. Jun 2019, at 15:45, Nuno Caldeira  wrote:
>
> As mentioned on the blog, i already asked facebook several times to comply. 
> They stopped replying. I'm not expecting a reply, i'm just sharing this on 
> the mailing list.


I guess you are expecting a reply from the OpenStreetMap-Foundation
board of directors or them publicly taking a position? Because this is
the n+1th time that unsatisfactory attribution (or completely missing
in the case of mini maps) by Facebook is raised here, and AFAIR there
was never an official statement by the board (members of the board may
have replied individually and with personal statements). I would
really welcome a clear statement from board, or at least one that
explains that board members have different opinions on this, or why it
takes them so long to say anything about it.

People have contributed to OSM under the Contributor Terms, where OSMF
acknowledged they would only distribute the data under the ODbL or
another free and open license chosen by the active contributors. Not
pursuing license violations (and not even attempting to do anything
against it) is against the spirit of the whole license idea and raises
questions about the validity of the Contributor Terms agreement.

As you have cited, for the abusers the situation is defined in the
license text, "9.0 Termination of Your rights under this License", and
by using the OSM data without attribution (as confirmed also by
Facebook in the email you have shared), their license is already
terminated, no notification necessary ("9.1 Any breach by You of the
terms and conditions of this License automatically terminates this
License with immediate effect and without notice to You.").
On the other hand, I believe most of us are not interested in
terminating the use of our data by them, we are happy for everyone
using it, it is the purpose of the project to create useful data. What
we want is simply the required attribution. Noone can use a
substantial part of the db without giving attribution.

In some way it is also in the interest of any of our data users that
there is attribution to OSM, because if the OSM community grows, it
will result in more accurate and up to date map data.

Cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Terminate Facebook rights under ODbL (Andy Mabbett )

[Nuno Caldeira]

As mentioned on the blog, i already asked facebook several times to comply.
They stopped replying. I'm not expecting a reply, i'm just sharing this on
the mailing list.

About my signature, i apologise as i have written the email on a webclient
that contains that signature. ADMIN please remove the signature

On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 at 12:08, Nuno Caldeira https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>> wrote:

>* To acknowledge,I have asked this to the board.
*>>* Dear board and board members,
*>>* Following my comment on this post
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/DrishT/diary/368711

*>>* I hereby request OSMF board, responsabile for the OSMF, as the
Licensor under
*>* ODbL 9.4 c) to notify Facebook and remove their rights under ODbL, if the
*>* violation is not fixed after 30 days of notice. as written on ODbL.
*
You posted a comment - on a Sunday - less than two hours before
requesting this? Do you not think it would be prudent - not to mention
courteous - to first wait for a response there?

>* Company Name is not responsible for errors or omissions in this message
*
Well, quite.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewinghttp://pigsonthewing.org.uk

--
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk