Linked Questions

I don't know why it's not on meta.stackexchange, but there's a post on meta SO explaining that there will be new guidelines for contributors starting January 1, 2016. Figured it's relevant here. ...

I’m David Fullerton, Stack Overflow’s CTO, responsible for the product, engineering, and community teams. I joined Stack Overflow in 2010 because I believed in the vision and mission of Stack ...

Recent cases of wholesale plagiarism like the four instances collected in this question (one, two, three, four) make me think, maybe there should be a clear policy on plagiarism in place in the FAQ? ...

I know this has been asked several times. I've read the responses. I'm still very confused. What are the legal requirements for using samples from SO in other projects? If there are requirements, ...

There have been two rounds of discussion about code licensing: The MIT License – Clarity on Using Code on Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange A New Code License: The MIT, this time with Attribution ...

A follow up from my comment about the new license announcement and samthebrand's response (also from the new license change attempt): The proposed new licensing terms differentiate between code and ...

Okay, so that proposal didn't go very well... Clearly, the community thinks Stack Overflow, Inc messed up with their license proposal. Now it is time to you to prove we, as a community, can do better....

Effective today, all Subscriber Content on Stack Overflow and the Stack Exchange network will be available under the terms of version 4.0 of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) ...

Stack Exchange is announcing the change from CC-BY-SA 3.0 to MIT License and the chaos has emerged. After a few hours of research, I've concluded that I've been breaking the law (license) since the ...

I'm not fully satisfied with Stack Exchange's recent proposal to change the code license to an MIT-like crayon license. What if I want the plain MIT license, where the license text must be replicated? ...

I've been thinking about the feedback over code licensing, and it seems like there's a significant gap in thinking between two portions of the user base - one that wants attribution, and one that ...

Actually CC BY-SA 3.0 is a license which looks pretty good for most Stack Exchange Network sites, but on Stack Overflow which is used mainly for coding questions, is pretty much rigid since a lot of ...

The rationale for the license change proposals is at least somewhat clear: i.e. to reduce legal concerns of using code from answers in software that may use incompatible licenses. However, what seems ...

Currently (and, I assume, since SO’s/SE’s existence) all user-generated content is licensed under a copyleft license. In the discussions The MIT License – Clarity on Using Code on Stack Overflow and ...

The license info in the footer of every Stack Exchange page contains a link to the blog post Attribution Required. In this post, Jeff Atwood explains what the attribution is required to contain. ...