Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

This question already has an answer here:

NB The following is a community-generated list of websites that republish Stack Exchange content without attributing it properly. It is no longer being maintained, because the procedure for reporting such sites has changed; see the duplicate for more information.

There are a number of license-violating clones of Stack Exchange sites popping up that use Stack Exchange's CC-wiki data without following our Creative Commons attribution terms. Those terms are linked at the bottom of every Stack Exchange webpage, and are also included as a .txt file in every data dump we produce.

Google now has a form for reporting content copiers that appear above the originals in search results.

Also, you can block unwanted sites from appearing in Google search from the search page itself:

The option to block a site appears when you click a search result and then navigate back to the search results page. Click the "Block" link next to that result to block all pages within the site's entire domain.

This post was created as an attempt to organize information originally posted in this answer. You may also be looking for the post for reporting copycat sites that outrank Stack Exchange in search results.


locked by Pops Nov 7 '13 at 16:05

This question exists because it has historical significance, but it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site, so please do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here. This question and its answers are frozen and cannot be changed. More info: help center.

marked as duplicate by Pops Oct 9 '13 at 20:24

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

I have never seen the CAPTCHA page as often as I did when I was adding the existing 40 or so answers to this question. – Pops May 8 '12 at 20:20
That is because you pasted. Try typing... Like a real person :) – Jeff Atwood May 12 '12 at 15:20
...yeeeeahhhh, I prefer the CAPTCHAs. – Pops May 12 '12 at 21:17
@JeffAtwood I would put a poison pill question(s) that only those APIs presented so that you could automatically re-scrap via Google and easily find infringing sites. Much like cartographers do on physical maps by putting fake locations or markers to easily spot copies. The thieves would never know what to look for and you could easily make this an automated process. – Jarrod Roberson Jul 14 '12 at 6:04
@Jeff is this handled at some level? Can we know which sites were reported and closed? – Shadow Wizard Aug 8 '12 at 10:58
@ShaWizDowArd I don't have a handy list of sites that have been dealt with, but we do monitor this thread and contact offenders. This post isn't just a black hole. :) – Adam Lear Aug 31 '12 at 22:25
It's a bit late for this comment, but if you ever want to check out what one of these sites looked like (if it was later removed), you can use one of the many webcache services online (I use the chrome web cache plugin) – Snakes and Coffee Mar 1 '13 at 9:02
Site blocking is currently unavailable through google unless you use Chrome and the Chrome blocking extension. – gebuh Mar 12 '13 at 18:27
I just went through and about 50% of these are gone. I edited some, until I got tired of it. Cleanup please? :) – Doorknob Apr 6 '13 at 1:01
@PopularDemand: Can you check please? I'm not entirely sure whether to classify it as an illegal clone or not. – Karan Apr 24 '13 at 23:25
@Karan FYI I'm just the user who posted the question, not an official person of any kind. – Pops Apr 24 '13 at 23:29
@PopularDemand: Thanks, maybe a mod will check it out then if they ever read my previous comment. – Karan Apr 24 '13 at 23:57
Is there a reason the original list of offenders was split into countless posts over multiple pages? Giving it its own topic, sure, but splitting into individual answers just makes searching for existing entries a PITA and invites duplicates. – Daniel Beck May 27 '13 at 8:49
Here's another one I don't think has been reported earlier, with fake author names and as far as I can see no attribution whatsoever: – Karan Jun 8 '13 at 22:27
@AnnaLear The RNQA site seems to still be going strong; here’s an ELU meta post about them scraping content from ELU. If there is anything more we can do, please let us know and we would be glad to pitch in in any way we can. Thanks. – tchrist Aug 4 '13 at 20:14

127 Answers 127

  • Uses content from Mathematics.SE.
  • Includes advertisements alongside content.
  • No mention of Stack Exchange as far as I can tell; lacks link to original author.
  • ID in URL matches that of copied content.

A few examples:

It lacks MathJAX too! Looks pretty atrocious – Old Checkmark Oct 9 '13 at 19:26 &

  • Links to the Stack Overflow main page (no follow)

  • No older posts. Assuming MSO post is accurate (new posts adhere to rules and are no follow)

  • Links to Stack Overflow question (no follow)

  • Example (
  • It looks like for this one, the person who posted it also has his own blog and posted the question there. He doesn’t link to us or any of the people on Stack Overflow who answered, but he doesn’t quote that text either - looks like he was just trying to get other answers from his readers.
share ("Best unofficial Apache Server developers community")

  • Question links redirect to homepage, on which I can’t figure out what’s happening.

  • Example (
  • This is a copy of the SU question How to move an application's dialog box from a disconnected monitor to the main, which links to another super user question (it includes a link to the second super user question, but not the one it copies)
  • Does not indicate the post came from Stack Exchange
  • Lists and includes links to asker and answerers

  • Example (
  • Aggregates Q&A’s from all around the web
  • Format: copies text of question, then links to our question as the answer
  • Does indicate that it came from Stack Overflow (logo in corner)
  • Hyperlinks to our question
  • Links to user who asked question and displays their name (bottom of page says “Post X days ago by _”)
  • Does not link to users who answered - but they don’t display the text of answers either (their answer is a link to our question)
It appears that they are compliant now, both questions and answers listed, with links to users, SO, all without nofollow. – Qantas 94 Heavy Sep 17 '13 at 2:32

  • Example (
  • Note: they describe themselves as “A collaboratively edited question and answer site.”
  • Indicates it came from Stack Overflow
  • Links back to original post and user profiles

  • Example (
  • Doesn’t acknowledge it came from Stack Overflow, link to Stack Overflow, or any of our user profiles

  • Question is attributed properly
  • Answers are attributed to users, but not directly to Stack Overflow

  • Example ( (original)
  • copies the adzerk divs, that is the only attribution
  • mangles usernames

  • Example ( (Original on Webmasters SE: Indexing for Google scholar, which tags to use?)
  • no mention of Stack Overflow anywhere on the site
  • no usernames at all, let alone credit to Stack Exchange users


  • Gives attribution to users and links to their Gaming Stack Exchange profiles
  • Does not link to the Gaming Stack Exchange question
  • Mangles some of the text even

  • No attribution at all whatsoever

  • no attribution at all
  • “Continue here” link is broken (seems to direct to some original source)
  • there is a <link rel=”> in the page source but it doesn’t seem to do anything

  • has an attrib link at the bottom claiming to get content from the Stack Exchange data dump
  • no credit to users or link to the question

  • no reference to SO or SE in any way
  • no attribution to users
  • does not post the answer
  • claims its own copyright on the content!

  • changing names of the users
  • replacing links of users to a single Indian site
  • claims copyright on the content

  • no attribution at all (at least not with JavaScript blocked)
  • The last editor is misattributed as the asker of the question and the link is to the main page of
  • Example:
Site's parked right now. – Qantas 94 Heavy Sep 17 '13 at 2:29

  • does contain link to "original source" but no author attribution
  • example question with my own content:

  • absolutely no attribution anywhere
  • example question with the same content as the above offender:

  • Example ( (original)
  • No names, links, or any attribution whatsoever. Contact link does not work.
  • Requires one to subscribe to see the accepted answer! (screenshot) That reminds me of some other site...

  • Entire site?
  • No link to original question or any reference to SO
  • No author names
  • Registration required to see the selected answer
  • Example:
  • Fortunately I have never seen it appear before SO on google search results, but it still is in violation.

  • Probably borderline. They DO show names and links on all pages, but the word 'stackoverflow' only appears on the home page: on other pages it's visible in an image, but I'm not sure if that counts

  • Example:
  • Links back, but no mention of StackOverflow, or the author's name
  • Claims "Copyright © 2011 All Rights Reserved" in the footer
  • Probably other subdomains of also exhibit the same behavior.

  • Pure scraping, no references of any kind
  • Example: (compare with C# Begin/EndReceive - how do I read large data?)
  • Author names removed from questions and answers
  • All the answers are rolled into one

  • Content from accepted questions is actively being scraped off of Gaming since July
  • There is no attribution for neither questions nor answers
  • The only link back to Stack Exchange is an obscure nofollow "more discussion" link

Update June 2012

  • Appears to abid by attribution rules now - sidebar indicates content is from Gaming, author names for both question and answer appear and are linked, and a "more discussion" link goes back to original question

My orginal question is:

500 - Internal server error in azure

And copy/paste link is:

They are required to:

1 - link to the original question.

2 - list as the author and link to myuser profile page on SO.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .