Timeline for "so long as they follow the Creative Commons attribution requirements" - but they don't
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2022 at 14:50 | comment | added | Rob | A partial default duplicate is the FAQ: A site (or scraper) is copying content from Stack Exchange. What should I do? because it ought to correctly explain the current situation, and what the user should do / expect (fixing the email to correspond with the expected outcomes is what this FR asks); and meta.stackexchange.com/a/343405/282094 | |
| May 10, 2022 at 14:20 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 10, 2022 at 14:43 | |||||
| May 10, 2022 at 14:07 | comment | added | bobble | @Luuklag even with that answer, it's not asking the same thing: for follow-ups instead of specific wording changes. The answer says there won't be follow-ups but says nothing about changing the wording, rightfully, since the question isn't asking about that. | |
| May 10, 2022 at 14:03 | comment | added | Luuklag | @bobble you read the answer from Animuson there, right? | |
| May 10, 2022 at 14:01 | comment | added | bobble | @Luuklag nope, because that is from a time they still pursued scrapers, so the proposed emails would tell about the company's progress. However I'm asking the company to explain their current stance that such pursuit will not happen at all. | |
| May 10, 2022 at 13:53 | history | edited | bobble | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| May 10, 2022 at 11:00 | comment | added | This_is_NOT_a_forum | Yes, they have given up. | |
| May 9, 2022 at 19:57 | comment | added | bobble | @Makyen yes, that's correct, but that's not the most natural reading of the first two paragraphs so I propose a rewrite to clarify | |
| May 9, 2022 at 19:56 | comment | added | Makyen | The statement is being made from a legal context. Only the copyright holder, or their assigned agent, has the ability to sue someone who is violating their copyright (i.e. has "standing" in court). Stack Overflow/Stack Exchange doesn't hold the copyright to user contributions and isn't an "agent" of the copyright holders (i.e. the contributors). Thus, SO/SE doesn't actually have the ability to force other parties to comply with the license. | |
| May 9, 2022 at 19:21 | comment | added | W.O. | Perhaps if you were to post details of the sites on meta, those members who's content was copied without attribution might be willing to take action. - Could the E-Mail include instructions to do that? It seems only reasonable that the members involved should have access to a record of such things somewhere. | |
| May 9, 2022 at 17:59 | comment | added | Random Person | I recall reporting such kinda sites and I didn't even get a reply from SE :( | |
| May 9, 2022 at 17:53 | history | asked | bobble | CC BY-SA 4.0 |