Linked Questions
10 questions linked to/from Should Stack Exchange switch to CC BY-SA 3.0?
-452
votes
24
answers
98k
views
Stack Exchange and Stack Overflow have moved to CC BY-SA 4.0
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) ...
- 181k
642
votes
272
answers
86k
views
Formatting Sandbox
Notes:
Answers will occasionally be moved to the Sandbox archive when there are too many of them. When using them to report bugs, keep an eye on the post.
You may also want to take a look at the ...
446
votes
21
answers
26k
views
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 ...
- 181k
229
votes
23
answers
19k
views
Creative Commons Licensing UI and Data Updates
When we last updated you to clarify concerns and answer questions about our transition to version 4.0 of the CC BY-SA license we committed to posting updates to the UI and addressing unanswered ...
- 61.5k
313
votes
5
answers
10k
views
Was the retroactive change to CC BY-SA 4.0 approved by Stack Exchange's lawyers?
Update: I have started a GoFundMe in an attempt to have a court or arbitrator settle this. It has raised a decent amount, but more will be necessary to retain counsel.
On 2019-09-05, Stack Exchange ...
- 4,568
20
votes
2
answers
977
views
Does SE need to switch to CC-BY-SA 4.0?
User contributions to Stack Exchange sites are licensed under Creative Commons; share alike, with attribution required. The version is 3.0, see cc-wiki in the footer.
However, the most current ...
- 1,814
13
votes
2
answers
515
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-...
- 1,454
12
votes
1
answer
553
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 ...
- 677
40
votes
0
answers
414
views
What is the status of the secure electronic opt-out of the mandatory arbitration that was promised?
In the comments of this post, Tim Post responds to my request for a "secure, electronic means" of the opt-out of mandatory arbitration with the following
@jhpratt And you'll get one. And a lot of ...
- 4,568
23
votes
1
answer
300
views
The create-chatroom page incorrectly specifies the conversations as licensed under "cc-wiki" (CC BY-SA 2.5)
The create a new chat-room page likely doesn't get a lot of traffic, which probably makes issues with it have a relatively low impact, but this one should be fixed:
The text reads:
All ...
- 19.4k