Linked Questions

16 votes
0 answers

Code licensing change for all SE sites [duplicate]

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. ...
Raystafarian's user avatar
555 votes
63 answers

The company’s commitment to rebuilding the relationship with you, our community

My name is Teresa Dietrich. About a month ago, I joined Stack Overflow as Head of Product and Community, reporting directly to the CEO. During my years as an engineer and technology leader, I saw the ...
Teresa Dietrich's user avatar
445 votes
21 answers

An Update On Creative Commons Licensing

We’d like to provide you with an update to our transition to version 4.0 of the CC BY-SA license. We realize that this is something that you care deeply about, and that our response to your concerns ...
user avatar
94 votes
6 answers

Plagiarism should be addressed specifically in the FAQ

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? ...
Pekka's user avatar
  • 114k
67 votes
5 answers

What is up with the source code license on Stack Overflow? [duplicate]

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, ...'s user avatar
72 votes
4 answers

Code licensing proposal — Point of order!

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 ...
200_success's user avatar
  • 12.5k
32 votes
12 answers

A New Code License: the Community Edition

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....
Patrick Hofman's user avatar
76 votes
6 answers

What is "code" for the purposes of the proposed MIT license switchover? [closed]

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 ...
David says Reinstate Monica's user avatar
40 votes
4 answers

CC-by-SA vs MIT - The 2016 battle

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 ...
Marco Aurélio Deleu's user avatar
20 votes
5 answers

What sort of attribution should Stack Exchange members expect for their work?

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 ...
user avatar
27 votes
3 answers

Can we have a dropdown to choose a code license?

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? ...
Anko's user avatar
  • 1,297
13 votes
4 answers

Is copy-pasting code from Stack Overflow an infringement to CC BY-SA 3.0 or is it considered fair use?

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 ...
Hacktivista's user avatar
27 votes
1 answer

Why separate code and non-code licensing?

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 ...
otus's user avatar
  • 577
8 votes
1 answer

Why should the new code license be permissive instead of copyleft?

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 ...
unor's user avatar
  • 3,062
23 votes
2 answers

"Attribution Required" misses requirement to reference the license [duplicate]

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. ...
unor's user avatar
  • 3,062

15 30 50 per page