@organicmaps

No problem on searching, finding and installing on F-Droid.

Organic Maps is marked with attached security advice, so if users configure strict matching they probably can't proceed...

@manankanchu it works for you, because you have changed that setting.

BTW, F-Droid deliberately misinforms users by labeling Organic Maps as such:
1. Our binary files are free assets and can be used by anyone. They are under a FOSS license that requires proper attribution.
2. The fact that the app downloads its maps from the app's CDN does not make the app "bad".

But that's another story/narrative pushed towards OM by some of the F-Droid guys.

Let's focus now on the installation issue.

@organicmaps

Any white-labeling or rebranding use requires explicit written permission from the Organic Maps team

this is not a free license. you may feel it's a reasonable and justified clause, and i wont argue against that, however it is factually incorrect to call it free in the sense of user freedom

@opensourceopenmind @manankanchu

@organicmaps

rebranding is seperate from attribution. attribution is important, but attribution is not the issue here. It's fair and reasonable to require attribution, but rebranding is an expected result of forks and downstream projects

free licenses permit the licenser to restrict the use of their name and logo as long as it doesn't practically limit the four freedoms, however the inverse, requiring derivitives to include your branding is a violation of the freedom to modify or redistribute modified copies. a core tenant of the freedom to redistribute, with or without modification, is the right to do so without permission. requiring the user to seek your conditional permission to perform a modification is a violation of freedom 3, making it not free

@opensourceopenmind @manankanchu

@memoria @opensourceopenmind @manankanchu looks like you’ve mixed it up. Attribution = mention the project = following the license terms. Skipping attribution without explicit permission = violating the license. Anyone can take binary maps or other files and use them for whatever needs, by following the license terms.

Do Wikipedia or OpenStreetMap.org allow removing their attribution and full rebranding as a different product?

@organicmaps @opensourceopenmind @manankanchu

nothing you said addressed the problem i explained, which is your incorrect claim that the data license is a free license

you conflate attribution and branding while sidestepping the free license problem. the data license may be a valid license, however that does not mean it's a free license.

requirements for attribution are allowed in free licenses. your provision for persisting branding with conditional permission to modify makes it not a free license

if you won't address the free license issue and continue to change the topic to different matters, then there's no reason to continue this conversation

@lina @organicmaps @opensourceopenmind @manankanchu

hi, i edited paragraph 3 to make it less ambiguous and more direct.

" im probably misunderstanding but are you saying that "attribution always required = free" and "attribution requirement can be removed by request = nonfree"?"

No. required attribution is good and is ubiquitous in free licenses

attribution is seperate from branding

the issue is the conditional permission to modify branding. the FSF recognizes licenses that require branding to be changed to avoid confusion between forks and derivative projects, but the FSF does not accept branding being used as a tool to effectively hinder or limit the user's freedom to modify and redistribute without permission.