Attribution mark & copyright page redesign

[jfirebaugh]

See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-April/066802.html

This is a reboot of the previous contributor mark pull request, #180.

Open issues:

• Don't mandate, but recommend/offer attribution mark
• Make it clear that /copyright is scrollable
• Let's do an alt text to make sure we're on Google's radar ;)
• Make sure mark is easy to embed
• Get model releases / finish captions

[lxbarth]

I'll also add:

• Get model releases / finish captions.

[ewmjc]

OSMF License Working Group input:

As this page has a "legal" impact, we discussed the proposal at our 7th May meeting https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PI83Tx48iQn7qFJgEUAG8U7lUb1jMzu8VS4F4famseQ/pub - item 6. Apologies for not highlighting this sooner.

1. Proposed revamp of http://openstreetmap.org/copyright with (draft) http://osmlab.github.io/attribution-mark/copyright/

For us, we need it to still say what we want it to say and have the right focus, (it is after all a formal copyright page!). Comments (based on the draft on 7th May):

General:

• Visually appealing page is a great idea, however, it is trying to be two pages at once.

Specific:

• Too much gap at the top when first clicking on the link, it is not clear that there is text on the page!
• The soft information “Local Knowledge” and “Community Driven” at the top should be moved to the bottom; “copyrighty” stuff MUST be prominent.
• The text for data, cartography and use of our tiles should be clearly separated to avoid confusion.
• The link to legal FAQ, preferably the one at osmfoundation.org, needs to go back.

2. We will support this initiative by checking that the replacement of the traditional (c) + year/entity text with “BY OSM” is indeed legally valid.

3. We will support this initiative by checking other trademarks that might overlap with "OSM" ... we do not (yet) own it and it is very short, so may be a risk.

Mike

[lxbarth]

@ewmjc - thanks for feedback and thank you for support.

Adjustments you suggest sound good to me. Focusing on a couple of other priorities now before circling back on this.

[simonpoole]

As some already know, there is a potential conflict with a trademark of the Ordnance Survey UK. The LWG is in contact with OS but hasn't heard back from them yet.

Further note: there is a more general issue wrt the mark and the current recommended way of attribution being sufficient according to the ODbL.

[jfirebaugh]

This is mutating into a more general "About" page as part of the redesign.

[lxbarth]

Fine to close this as this PR has gone stale. I do see much of the ideas here going not only into /about but also into /copyright - or whichever place we want people to link to from attribution.