[OSM-legal-talk] Preventing vandalism by omitting attribution?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

[OSM-legal-talk] Preventing vandalism by omitting attribution?

Stefan Baebler

Over the weekend i noticed an insurance company's advertisement for driver grading app, which is:
a) showing OSM map tiles with no attribution (neither by the map nor in any legalese text)
b) presumably using OSM's maxspeed data to detect traffic violations from driver's traces

The insurance company is giving discounts to "safe" drivers based on their grades.
Nice approach to improve traffic safety and increase their profits.

It is fairly obvious that they should add the attribution for the tiles at least, but increased OSM visibility/recognition might encourage vandalism (raising maxspeed limits or simply deleting them or even deleting the whole roads / areas) with monetary incentive.

How about if they show other (eg Google tiles) but still use OSM data in their backend for grading? Where should the attribution be placed in such case?

We haven't contacted the offender yet, so we don't know yet if they even realize their contractor is offering the service based on OSM data or are they purposely omitting attribution, violating the OSM license in the process.

How can we accurately verify OSM use in the backend without introducing bogus (copyright easter egg) maxspeed data?

Are there any legal requirements regarding their data (driver's gathered traces, their OSM data fixes) towards OSM? Probably not for  traces, but any possibly fixed OSM data should be contributed back to OSM. (Easter eggs in form of 1km/h speed limit around their offices comes to mind :) )

Is there any prior practice with such situations? Any suggestions as to how to proceed in this specific situation apart from what is already written in wiki ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution ) ?

best regards,

legal-talk mailing list
[hidden email]