The license seems to already require this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright/

Maybe I am misunderstanding the summary, but it says: "If you publicly use any adapted version of this database, or works produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL." <https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/>

▲

mips_avatar 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yeah the problem is what's considered an adapted database. If it was strict it would mean apps like Alltrails (which is 90% openstreetmaps data) would need to list their trailmaps as open databases, but they don't.

	▲	cwillu a minute ago \| parent [-]
		The problem is that factual details aren't copyrightable in the first place, so no amount of licensing will prevent organizations with enough money to pay a lawyer from understanding this and using the data as they see fit. And on the flip side, those organizations can pay those same lawyers to write scary boilerplate to make it seem like their map data is “proprietary” and therefore “protected by copyright” even though it isn't.