Linked Questions

517
votes
58answers
83k views

The MIT License – Clarity on Using Code on Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange

Update (Dec. 22, 2015): Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and ...
139
votes
26answers
14k views

Electronic opt-out, correcting miscommunication, and additional questions answered about the 2018 ToS update

We’ve listened to what you’ve been telling us about the arbitration clause that our most recent ToS update introduced. While we can't incorporate all of the feedback you offered, we did listen to it, ...
52
votes
35answers
20k views

New top bar is coming to the Stack Exchange network

Update: See: New top bar next steps and response to feedback I'm the new product manager for the DAG team. I’m excited to announce that the top bar design that has been on Stack Overflow ...
90
votes
11answers
9k views

Auto-inserting Stack Overflow affiliate into all Amazon links

We have officially discontinued the Amazon book affiliate remnant ads, since despite our best efforts they don't perform well for our audience and cannot be made to perform well. We've often wondered,...
381
votes
1answer
16k views

A site (or scraper) is copying content from Stack Exchange. What should I do?

Since day one of Stack Overflow, all content posted on Stack Exchange sites by their users (i.e. you wonderful people) has been provided to the whole universe under the CC BY-SA license. For my fellow ...
40
votes
4answers
870 views

Please negotiate and make obvious user-favorable license terms for uploaded images

Uploading photos to Imgur appears to assign them rights to do whatever they wish with them. It would appear that, taken on face value, uploading an image to Imgur gives them total non-exclusive ...
18
votes
3answers
380 views

Why don’t we call our licence by name?

Why does Stack Exchange use this weird “cc-wiki” euphemism instead of calling the CC-BY-SA by its real name? This is a bug report disguised as a question. As in: please fix the footer.
29
votes
2answers
1k views

Stack Exchange should stop using the Creative Commons logo

If I understand correctly, SE reproduces its user-produced content using a CC-BY-SA license with additional restrictions: namely, from point 3 of the TOS, In the event that You post or otherwise ...
49
votes
1answer
558 views

Free meta from the tyranny of nofollow!

(Yes, the title is obviously hyperbole. See comments below.) In this comment, Shog9 confirms that all links from meta sites to outside the Stack Exchange network are marked with rel=nofollow, causing ...
16
votes
2answers
775 views

imgur, copyrighted images from the web, and imgur accounts

I noticed that when one uses the new super-cool WMD Image tool and choose "From the web" that the image is still uploaded to imgur. Are there any concerns that this might result in the unauthorized ...
5
votes
2answers
295 views

Is it too late to change the SE content license?

While researching the licensing for SE sites, I've come across a few questions about changing the license terms (e.g. updating the CC-BY-SA version). Let's assume there was a good but non-...
5
votes
1answer
346 views

Should Stack Exchange switch to CC BY-SA 3.0?

Currently, Stack Exchange sites use the CC BY-SA 2.5 license. There's a lot of content (not the least of which is Wikipedia) under the newer 3.0 version of this license. Content licensed under 2.5 ...
14
votes
1answer
239 views

Are we allowed according to the ToS to exempt a part of our post from the CC license?

tl;dr: Right now we are not allowed to cite outside sources (unless they are compatible with cc by-sa 3.0) or use images under fair use exceptions in our posts. Creative Commons provides guidance how ...
10
votes
1answer
284 views

Legal page says user content is under cc-by-sa-3.0, but other pages say cc-by-sa-2.5

The legal page has two references to "the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license," and both of them link to cc-by-sa version 3.0. However, the bottom of every page links to version 2.5. So ...
15
votes
0answers
187 views

What licence is subscriber content provided under 4.0, 3.0 or them all?

In the footer it says: site design / logo © 2018 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required. rev 2018.8.7.31273 However, in the footer under ...