This question already has an answer here:

This site: Wiki Jammer seems eerily familiar to our own Stack Exchange model, but a few things seem off.

  • The wording of the FAQ
  • The lack of the top bar colouring
  • No 'Inbox' dropdown in the top left

...Actually, at this point I'm certain that they do not associate with us at all. Having said that, what do we, as a community, do when we come across sites like these?

  • Do we Observe and Report (such as what I'm doing here)?
  • Email the operators of the site?
  • Contact Stack Exchange Directly?

Or do we simply just ignore it and move along?

marked as duplicate by slugster, Time Traveling Bobby, Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard, hims056, Lucifer Jun 11 '13 at 7:45

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.

  • 2
  • @hjpotter92 - That's nice, so I just add mine as another answer right? – Robotnik Jun 11 '13 at 6:45
  • What exactly makes them infringing? It's fairly obvious that they're not a Stack Exchange site (they're using OSQA, btw), so I'm not seeing an issue. – balpha Jun 11 '13 at 6:46
  • We wish them good luck – Bart Jun 11 '13 at 6:47
  • @balpha - sorry, I didn't mean to imply they were already infringing, I just wanted to find out how we address sites that seem like they infringe. I've removed the infringing bit. – Robotnik Jun 11 '13 at 6:49
  • Ha. Sort by most voted. One vote in 1.5yrs. – Aza Jun 11 '13 at 6:54
  • 2
    Also this entire site seems to be an advertisement. – Aza Jun 11 '13 at 6:58

Just copying the general Q&A idea isn't something we usually have a problem with, as long as it's clear that a site is not an actual Stack Exchange site.

There are various clones of our Q&A system around, so it's not surprising that some sites out there use them. In fact, various Stack Exchange 1.0 sites moved on to use some of these clones to continue their site after SE 1.0 wasn't offered anymore.

The bigger problem we have with people who copy the content without giving the proper attribution (see Report sites that use Stack Exchange content without following attribution rules here), but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

Disclaimer: IANAL, and I'm probably not authorized to speak for the company on legal matters (but if I am, there shall be free beer for all).

  • Makes sense to me, thanks for clearing this up – Robotnik Jun 11 '13 at 7:00

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