Return to Answer

See Defending Attribution Required from the Stack Overflow Blog:

[W]e adopted a licensing scheme that makes it impossible for us to do anything even partially-semi-evil with our community’s content. Namely, cc-by-sa (aka cc-wiki), which gives everyone the following rights to all Stack Exchange data:

You are free:

• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

---

What are our attribution requirements?

Let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
3. Show the author names for every question and answer
4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection.

---

We’ve been collecting a list of sites that are reposting our data without attributing it correctly — but it’s becoming something of an epidemic lately. Every other day now I get an email or meta report about a real live web search where someone found content that is clearly ripped off, has zero useful attribution, and a bucket of greasy, slimy ads slathered all over it to boot.

See Defending Attribution Required from the Stack Overflow Blog:

[W]e adopted a licensing scheme that makes it impossible for us to do anything even partially-semi-evil with our community’s content. Namely, cc-by-sa (aka cc-wiki), which gives everyone the following rights to all Stack Exchange data:

You are free:

• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

---

What are our attribution requirements?

Let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
3. Show the author names for every question and answer
4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection.

---

We’ve been collecting a list of sites that are reposting our data without attributing it correctly — but it’s becoming something of an epidemic lately. Every other day now I get an email or meta report about a real live web search where someone found content that is clearly ripped off, has zero useful attribution, and a bucket of greasy, slimy ads slathered all over it to boot.

See Defending Attribution Required from the Stack Overflow Blog:

[W]e adopted a licensing scheme that makes it impossible for us to do anything even partially-semi-evil with our community’s content. Namely, cc-by-sa (aka cc-wiki), which gives everyone the following rights to all Stack Exchange data:

 

You are free:

 

• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• to Remix — to adapt the work

 

Under the following conditions:

 

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

 

What are our attribution requirements?

 

Let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

 

1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
3. Show the author names for every question and answer
4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

 

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection.

 

We’ve been collecting a list of sites that are reposting our data without attributing it correctly — but it’s becoming something of an epidemic lately. Every other day now I get an email or meta report about a real live web search where someone found content that is clearly ripped off, has zero useful attribution, and a bucket of greasy, slimy ads slathered all over it to boot.

See Defending Attribution Required from the Stack Overflow Blog:

[W]e adopted a licensing scheme that makes it impossible for us to do anything even partially-semi-evil with our community’s content. Namely, cc-by-sa (aka cc-wiki), which gives everyone the following rights to all Stack Exchange data:

You are free:

• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

---

What are our attribution requirements?

Let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
3. Show the author names for every question and answer
4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection.

---

We’ve been collecting a list of sites that are reposting our data without attributing it correctly — but it’s becoming something of an epidemic lately. Every other day now I get an email or meta report about a real live web search where someone found content that is clearly ripped off, has zero useful attribution, and a bucket of greasy, slimy ads slathered all over it to boot.

See Defending Attribution Required from the Stack Overflow Blog:

[W]e adopted a licensing scheme that makes it impossible for us to do anything even partially-semi-evil with our community’s content. Namely, cc-by-sa (aka cc-wiki), which gives everyone the following rights to all Stack Exchange data:

You are free:

• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

What are our attribution requirements?

Let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
3. Show the author names for every question and answer
4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection.

We’ve been collecting a list of sites that are reposting our data without attributing it correctly — but it’s becoming something of an epidemic lately. Every other day now I get an email or meta report about a real live web search where someone found content that is clearly ripped off, has zero useful attribution, and a bucket of greasy, slimy ads slathered all over it to boot.

See Defending Attribution Required from the Stack Overflow Blog:

[W]e adopted a licensing scheme that makes it impossible for us to do anything even partially-semi-evil with our community’s content. Namely, cc-by-sa (aka cc-wiki), which gives everyone the following rights to all Stack Exchange data:

You are free:

• to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

What are our attribution requirements?

Let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
3. Show the author names for every question and answer
4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., https://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection.

We’ve been collecting a list of sites that are reposting our data without attributing it correctly — but it’s becoming something of an epidemic lately. Every other day now I get an email or meta report about a real live web search where someone found content that is clearly ripped off, has zero useful attribution, and a bucket of greasy, slimy ads slathered all over it to boot.