I have collected evidences that every details that I have contributed to OSM are reproduced (after about 2 weeks) on Google Maps (including very thin details patiently added, or some very small details that were voluntarily moved or unaligned, or precise details of crossing roads and modified directions, and details that were not visible on the satellite photos but only estimated, or patiently looked for by looking at actual street photos, such as street numbers, collected myself and not from the partial views visible in Google StreetView). How is that possible that Google Maps can display those details without crediting the OSM source or at least indicating its applicable licence? Instead Google just displays its OWN restrictive licence. It llooks like an abuse by Google, and I don't see why Google could steal our data and threatening us if we ever use some details that we could have collected when exploring Google Maps, or checking the closed view photos on Google Street View. I don't think that this would minimize the work made by me in OSM, but at least Google should cooperate in a more friendly way, by admitting that it also aggregates data from open sources like OpenStreetMap (or other public map data collections with an open/free licencing that we also use and credit). I really think that Google has all the means to track the sources of its data, even when it later modifies its aggregation (but under copyright law, it must still obey the rules of "derived works"). In the same way, I've seen Bing Maps also reusing OSM data, but I've not looked precisely the licencing terms (and Bing cooperates with OSM, by offering a free access to its satellite imagery)...

I have collected evidences that every details that I have contributed to OSM are reproduced (after about 2 weeks) on Google Maps (including very thin details patiently added, or some very small details that were voluntarily moved or unaligned, or precise details of crossing roads and modified directions, and details that were not visible on the satellite photos but only estimated, or patiently looked for by looking at actual street photos, such as street numbers, collected myself and not from the partial views visible in Google StreetView). How is that possible that Google Maps can display those details without crediting the OSM source or at least indicating its applicable licence? Instead Google just displays its OWN restrictive licence. It llooks like an abuse by Google, and I don't see why Google could steal our data and threatening us if we ever use some details that we could have collected when exploring Google Maps, or checking the closed view photos on Google Street View. I don't think that this would minimize the work made by me in OSM, but at least Google should cooperate in a more friendly way, by admitting that it also aggregates data from open sources like OpenStreetMap (or other public map data collections with an open/free licencing that we also use and credit). I really think that Google has all the means to track the sources of its data, even when it later modifies its aggregation (but under copyright law, it must still obey the rules of "derived works"). In the same way, I've seen Bing Maps also reusing OSM data, but I've not looked precisely the licencing terms (and Bing cooperates with OSM, by offering a free access to its satellite imagery)...