Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 8th Mar 2012 17:25 UTC
Apple "Yesterday Apple launched iPhoto, its photo management app, for the iPad and iPhone... And we're rather pleased to find they're the latest to switch to OpenStreetMap. [...] The OSM data that Apple is using is rather old (start of April 2010) so don't expect to see your latest and greatest updates on there. It's also missing the necessary credit to OpenStreetMap's contributors; we look forward to working with Apple to get that on there." Pretty ironic coming from a company suing the living daylights out of everyone over rounded corners and bouncy-scroll effects, but alas, I'm sure there's some construed justification coming up from the usual suspects.
Order by: Score:
Broken link
by cheemosabe on Thu 8th Mar 2012 17:53 UTC
cheemosabe
Member since:
2009-11-29

<a hef="http://parislemon.com/">

hef instead of href.

Reply Score: 1

It's not ironic
by phoudoin on Thu 8th Mar 2012 18:13 UTC
phoudoin
Member since:
2006-06-09

If it's true, it's not ironic, it's hypocrite.

Nothing new, indeed, but having proof that IP, licence and legal issues are seen as highly deserving respect (and profit advantage) only when from their side, while on the other side they do as all others does : they too "steal", reuse, and/or try to take profit, sorry, credit when it's not due.

Business as usual, aka twisted and unfair wrapped in a glossy moralistic gifty packaging.

Reply Score: 10

RE: It's not ironic
by shmerl on Thu 8th Mar 2012 19:09 UTC in reply to "It's not ironic"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

I.e. Apple's indecent "business as usual".

Reply Score: 10

Comment by motang
by motang on Thu 8th Mar 2012 19:11 UTC
motang
Member since:
2008-03-27

Anyone really surprised? I am pretty sure they have done this before.

Reply Score: 6

Sad but true...
by Gestahlt on Thu 8th Mar 2012 20:24 UTC
Gestahlt
Member since:
2011-10-17

This is pretty spineless and only shows how that company is lacking integrity.

It´s not like that Apple couldn´t afford to say "Thanks".

Reply Score: 10

.
by marcp on Thu 8th Mar 2012 21:23 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

Corporate bitches. Boycott multinational corporations.

Reply Score: 1

RE: .
by re_re on Fri 9th Mar 2012 16:40 UTC in reply to "."
re_re Member since:
2005-07-06

"Corporate bitches. Boycott multinational corporations"

So you are saying we should return to the dark ages prior to the industrial revolution? If you put any thought into your comment at all and you and still believe that all multinational corporations should be boycotted, well...... I'll leave it at that.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: .
by marcp on Sat 10th Mar 2012 01:24 UTC in reply to "RE: ."
marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

You see, THEY made you believe there's NO OTHER OPTION, which is definitely not true.

The problem is that THEY are imposing THEIR policy on YOU.

The question is: are you willing to take your chance to stay independent in the age of global dependence?
Are you strong enough to know your needs, your rights, your local environment?

Of course, you can stay in your cosy warm place forever. Is your cosy cage the place you want to live in?

That's your choice, not mine.

I do not intend to make you believe in anything I say. It's up to you to get all the info.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: .
by zima on Thu 15th Mar 2012 23:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: ."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Ah yes, THEY, it's all because of THEM...

PEOPLE form multinational corporations. The PEOPLE are their largest shareholders (retirement funds, interest rates of savings, and so on) & most interested in maximum returns.
WE.
They are expression of OUR ways and desires (just made possible now on such scale by easier transport, communication, etc.)

Anyway, I'm pretty sure you're not doing the boycotting yourself... (what do you use to read and write these comments? Or, going into basics - from where your clothes and food, warmth (energy), or transportation come from?)

Reply Score: 2

JoeBuck
Member since:
2006-01-11

... so perhaps they intend to fork OSM to avoid the new license (though even the old license means they must give credit)?

Reply Score: 2

Not2Sure Member since:
2009-12-07

... so perhaps they intend to fork OSM to avoid the new license (though even the old license means they must give credit)?


That is correct and my assumption as well. It will be fairly interesting to see how it plays out as a test of the limits of CC-SA. Basically, if you take some data under CC-SA and improve it, eventually (but how long does it take before) it's "your" data and attribution is no longer necessary. CC-SA was always a bad license for "malleable" information imho. Take a map with some OSM data and layer on some other data from other sources. What license(s) apply to the final map result/output?

That is one of the many reasons that OSM moved to the ODbl license in May of 2010. The other primarily being as I recall that US copyright law has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on data and is meant to apply only to literary, artistic works.

Reply Score: 2