Actually, OSM policy is to "map what's on the ground", meaning prioritizing the names used on signs in the area, which is exactly what I've done. See: osm.wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

Using an unusual spelling that doesn't exist on local signs makes the map less useful for most users.

Names used in government databases that don't match the signs on the ground are supposed to be tagged with "official_name", not "name" (osm.wiki/Key:official_name)

Dear Tom,
Okay, thanks for the clarification on that. I think the guidelines could be a lot clearer. They specifically mention tracing and "copying" (a vague term that I wouldn't have thought applied in this case), but if you don't even want people to reference copyrighted maps to find out what a place is called, I think it would be helpful to explicitly say so. By many people's logic (including my own), this is no different from referencing a fact from a book when writing an article.
Best,
Evan

I understand your concern, but facts can't be copyrighted, only original representations of them, such as styles or arrangements created by the uthor: osm.wiki/w/images/6/6f/Protection_of_Collaborative_Online_Maps_under_US_Copyright_Law.pdf

Referencing a map for place names can no more be copyright infringement than writing a book that cites facts learned from other books.

Even trap streets have been rejected as copyrighteable by US courts: https://www.leagle.com/decision/19921525796fsupp72911403

I understand that these issues aren't well clarified in the OSM guidelines, so I don't hold whatever position you settle on against you, but I do hope that a correct and reasonable understanding of actual copyright law can prevail in the OSM project.

Oh, I didn't trace anything from the map though. I was just referencing it for place names.