I read the 'blog post on the CC-Wiki license in use for the Stack Overflow content (and by extension, the Server Fault contents, since that's what actually affects me).

Personally when I write something on SF which I think is interesting, I may also copy it to my own private (although publically accessible) wiki. I usually, but don't always, credit myself and link back to SF in my local copy.

My internal logic is that because I am the original author, I can grant a CC-Wiki license to SF, and whatever-license-I-please to myself to permit my own copy.

So my question is: is this behavior consistent with the content use philosophy?

This is highly theoretical right now since A) I'm nobody and B) nobody would really care about my use of this content, but at some point it is going to matter.

Second question. I'm Canadian, so strictly speaking my content is subject to Canadian copyright law. Does that make any difference?

Hopefully this all falls under "stupid question."

I read the 'blog post on the CC-Wiki license in use for the Stack Overflow content (and by extension, the Server Fault contents, since that's what actually affects me).

Personally when I write something on SF which I think is interesting, I may also copy it to my own private (although publically accessible) wiki. I usually, but don't always, credit myself and link back to SF in my local copy.

My internal logic is that because I am the original author, I can grant a CC-Wiki license to SF, and whatever-license-I-please to myself to permit my own copy.

So my question is: is this behavior consistent with the content use philosophy?

This is highly theoretical right now since A) I'm nobody and B) nobody would really care about my use of this content, but at some point it is going to matter.

Second question. I'm Canadian, so strictly speaking my content is subject to Canadian copyright law. Does that make any difference?

Hopefully this all falls under "stupid question."