Return to Answer

Does this licensing proposal apply to the Stack Overflow documentation project? If so, you might as well kill that project now. Who would want to use that documentation resource if it meant you had to cite all the example code from it?

Does this licensing proposal apply to the Stack Overflow documentation project? If so, you might as well kill that project now. Who would want to use that documentation resource if it meant you had to cite all the example code from it?

… and the economy is in a slump. Pundits on CNN are attributing the decline to a lack of growth in the computing sector. According to the Alyssa P. Bitdiddle, senior analyst with the Society of Innovative Computer Programmers,

… and the economy is in a slump. Pundits on CNN are attributing the decline to a lack of growth in the computing sector. According to Alyssa P. Bitdiddle, senior analyst with the Society of Innovative Computer Programmers,

She added,

Ironically, this culture of licensing paranoia started with noble intentions. The founders, Jeff Atwood and Joel Spolsky, wanted to promote remixing and reusing content. Creative Commons licensing was used as a pact with the contributors: since the community owned the content, the knowledge base could never be privatized like IMDb, CDDB, or Experts Exchange. Later, concerns were raised that somehow code should not be Creative Commons-licensed, one thing led to another, and now the entire industry is paying dearly. We will never know for sure, but if Stack Overflow had been a normal forum without the Creative Commons license, software developers today would not have to struggle with licensing code snippets — as if the software patent minefield weren't bad enough already!