Difference between revisions of "Board/Minutes/2022-02-S2S/Attribution - Agree on an attribution enforcement strategy"
(+ draft notes)
m (Dorothea moved page Board/Minutes/Board/Minutes/2022-02-S2S/Attribution - Agree on an attribution enforcement strategy to Board/Minutes/2022-02-S2S/Attribution - Agree on an attribution enforcement strategy: Removed duplicated URL part)
Latest revision as of 16:22, 23 March 2022
Notes by participants. Might be enriched.
This session took place in parallel with "Parallel session: Local Chapter minimum criteria - (including formalisation/clarification on commercial activities)". A summary was provided to the other group.
- Amanda McCann
- Guillaume Rischard
- Tobias Knerr
- Mikel Maron
Post-meeting formatting and addition of links by Dorothea Kazazi.
G: reports on MusicBrainz' strong approach
A: mentions board talking to OSMF Licensing Working Group (LWG) talking to big corp members, and suggests no longer being corporate members G: this would hurt us more than them. Not just big corp members who don't follow the guidelines.
Tobias suggests: no presentations at sotm ~~sponsorship~~, or limitations on organised editing
G: Belgium is writing "love letters" (to organisations who do not display appropriate attribution to OSM)
G: LWG is working on a template letter for use by community members in minor cases of missing attribution
A: Mapbox and Facebook (OSMF Corporate Members) are at least informally aware of current attribution requirements through employees who are LWG members
T: MusicBrainz sells non-open data, which is not what OSM(F) does
G: Apple is a large data consumer which everyone forgets
A: Facebook/Meta is not the worst, and is better than Apple
G: LWG has a draft for “love letter”, and are working on a proper one, but no timeline on when it'll be ready
G: Be careful not to “cut off our nose to spite our face”
T: Restrictions on State of the Map (SotM) conference Sponsorship might have financial hit, but talks at sotm shouldn't financially hurt sotm/osmf
A: volunteered to float the idea of sotm restrictions with State of the Map organising committee (SotM WG)
- Wait for love letters from LWG [LWG]
- Then, send open love letters to large data consumers [Board with LWG]
What to do if you don't follow the licence (ideas)
- cancel corporate membership (but some think this hurts us more than them)
- Restrictions to State of the Map sponsors (but also has financial consequences)
- no presentations at State of the Map (but want to check with SotM team)
- limitations on organised editing
- Press releases calling on them to attribute us better
- Licence revoked
- Legal action
- Publish an open letter calling on them to attribute us properly
Large consumers not attributing properly
- Amanda McCann to ask the OSMF State of the Map working group (SotM-WG) about the idea of restricting SotM presentations for big attribution violators.
- Amanda McCann to mention the attribution guidelines during the next Advisory Board meeting.
- Guillaume Rischard to bring the topic up at the introductory meeting with Angelina Calderon, new Facebook/Meta Advisory Board representative [next week].
- Guillaume Rischard to arrange a meeting with Robert Kaye of MusicBrainz and the board about their experience with copyright enforcement.