[Touch Diamond, MDA Compact IV General] low.flying.pigs:
To address each part in turn:

It must as has been exhaustively previously documented.

The fact and clear statement that attribution must be shown is a straightforward and readily understandable notice to developers that their implementation also requires enforcement to prevent trivial simplistic circumvention, and that unless that is done, they have failed in their requirement that attribution must be shown by failing to reasonably ensure that it is.

There are no valid reasons not to implement what is required. This is why all responsible and reasonable projects, that are still in development, that wish to avoid unnecessary legal unpleasantness, and are respectful of others, have done so long ago.

All OpenStreetMap based mapping requires on screen attribution as does any mapping subject to Copyright with that requirement.

All users that wish to legitimately use such mapping require on screen attribution for compliance with terms of usage.

It is therefore clear far from no one needing this information, it is in fact needed by the vast majority of users and absolutely needed by the GPS Cycle Computer project.

Discrete attribution of suitable prominence is all that is required. Inherently the map is not covered. Implemented normally, it is in fact almost entirely visible. Furthermore the map can be adjusted if necessary to view the small area where the attribution is. Alternatively the user can choose not to use maps subject to Copyright that require on screen attribution and the user will not therefore have this non issue. Such a user will instead have the real issue of finding such a map that would actually be suitable.

Discrete attribution of suitable prominence is all that is required. 4.12beta23 did not achieve that.

4.12beta23 modified as post 2326 does but is non compliant and as stated therein was provided in the interim until 4.12beta24 officially addresses the issues, and implemented the additional copyright attribution measures required detailed in post 2321.

4.12beta24 implementing those modifications almost exactly but without the additional measures is therefore non compliant.

Discrete attribution of suitable prominence is all that is required. It has not been suggested anywhere prominence should be anything other than that, and certainly not 'big bold letters in the middle of the screen' which is entirely outlandish and absurd.

There would appear no other purpose of 'big bold letters in the middle of the screen' being entirely absurd other than to deliberately urge people to disable copyright attribution completely given discrete attribution of suitable prominence is all that is required.

If a developer were foolish enough to take such deliberately absurd and nonsensical action, which lawyers consider to be a form of malicious compliance and a court may well consider to be a form of contempt for the requirements of Copyright attribution, they would find themselves horrendously exposed and liable were the matter to be pursued.

Apart from any effect of urging users, such ill considered and petulant developer action actually urges legal proceedings, there being no available defence and certainty of outcome.

XDA Developers, and indeed any third party hosting such material, and following industry standard practice, would take down immediately on receipt of Copyright infringement notice, regardless of merit, so as to not incur any further potential liability themselves. Tile Servers would be well within their rights to block access by GPS Cycle Computer.

Most ordinary normal users of rational sound mind and judgement wish to comply with their obligations relating to usage of mapping.

Such users using OpenStreetMaps are thankful such a project exists providing ability to create free mapping and access to free mapping. All that is required in return for usage is compliance with terms which include discrete attribution of suitable prominence. That is hardly unreasonable and a normal user would want to show their support in complying with that minimal requirement.

Furthermore a normal user would not want the GPS Cycle Computer project, any developer, or themselves, to suffer any legal unpleasantness.

Some leeway may be allowed whilst still limited distribution beta, but any release of 4.12 final lacking obviously requisite enforcement is unjustifiable, and woe betide any developer foolish enough to do so given little if anything effective could be done for them, by anyone, in their defence.

At it's most basic, the requirement is simple: no on screen attribution, no display of map, without exception. What is not simple to understand is any misguided reluctance to compliance with that.

low.flying.pigs