Questions tagged [creative-commons]

The Creative Commons license allows the distribution of copyrighted works. Use this tag for questions on how the Stack Exchange network makes use of the CC-license.

Filter by
Sorted by
Tagged with
171 votes
1 answer

How do I remove my name from a post, in accordance with CC BY-SA?

The Creative Commons FAQ states that: Third, if the licensor does not like how the material has been modified or used, CC licenses require that the licensee remove the attribution information upon ...
-452 votes
24 answers

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) ...
Tim Post's user avatar
  • 181k
-342 votes
60 answers

A New Code License: The MIT, this time with Attribution Required

Update: January 15, 2016 Thank you for your patience and feedback. The changes proposed here have been delayed indefinitely - we'll be back later to open some more discussions. Important context for ...
samthebrand's user avatar
  • 5,210
542 votes
58 answers

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 ...
samthebrand's user avatar
  • 5,210
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
38 votes
6 answers

Dealing with posts plagiarising from copyrighted sources

What means do users have to report plagiarism or posting of copyrighted work? A button to flag content as plagiarism would be useful. It's not quite "offensive," and should probably have a different ...
jmanning2k's user avatar
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
40 votes
2 answers

Stack Exchange should stop using the Creative Commons logo [duplicate]

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 use ...
Federico Poloni's user avatar
259 votes
2 answers

Will concerns regarding the move to CC BY-SA 4.0 elicit any further dialogue from Stack Exchange, Inc.?

Fifteen days ago, it was suddenly announced that the user-contributed content on Stack Exchange had been relicensed as CC BY SA 4.0. The change took immediate and retroactive effect and is still in ...
Lightness Races in Orbit's user avatar
47 votes
2 answers

Could we have a Help Center page on disassociating posts?

As a moderator I sometimes1 find myself needing to explain disassociation to a user, usually one who has tried to delete posts that he's belatedly realized are connected to him. It'd sure be handy if ...
Monica Cellio's user avatar
35 votes
3 answers

Are the SE additions to the Creative Commons attribution requirements enforceable? [duplicate]

In the footer of Stack Exchange sites, it is stated that user contributions are licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0 with a contradictory and incompatible attribution requirement addendum. The “attribution ...
Kris's user avatar
  • 475
25 votes
3 answers

By posting a selection of previously written text here, are we waiving our copyrights to the excerpt?

Posts on Stack Exchange sites have a Creative Commons license applied. However, on Writers, people will post snippets of their own writing for critique purposes. Does that mean that if I post a ...
Goodbye Stack Exchange's user avatar
20 votes
0 answers

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 ...
Peilonrayz's user avatar
  • 3,627
12 votes
1 answer

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 ...
Matthew Flaschen's user avatar
10 votes
1 answer

Should Stack Exchange switch to CC BY-SA 3.0? [duplicate]

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 ...
mattdm's user avatar
  • 4,487
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
12 votes
2 answers

Is proper attribution given when a moderator edits someone's comment?

As far as I know according to CC BY-SA 3.0 if someone edits any question/answer of a user then proper attribution is given that someone edited such and such content at say 12 P.M 1 January 2015. The ...
user31782's user avatar
  • 418
142 votes
1 answer

What gives SE the legal right, under the CC-BY-SA license, to modify user profiles without indicating that the content has changed?

The Terms of Service clearly indicated that all content that you provide to SO Inc is licensed under CC-BY-SA, and that would include your About Me section of your user profile, which SO Inc is ...
user avatar
37 votes
2 answers

Are these eBooks that copy from SE illegal?

So, this guy has made a bunch of eBooks based on Stack Exchange content. Making books of SE stuff is okay, but two rules need to be followed: Attribution License the work under CC-BY-SA as well This ...
PyRulez's user avatar
  • 1,524
29 votes
2 answers

Can SE just resell our data, relicense it and remove the attribution requirement?

SE has decided to charge for the network content when used for training AI according to an article. This has not been officially announced here, so we do not know the details. But the main question to ...
Mad Scientist's user avatar
18 votes
3 answers

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.
kinokijuf's user avatar
  • 818
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
53 votes
3 answers

EU copyright laws (2018-2019). Any risk for Stack Exchange?

The European Parliament JURI committee will be voting on 20th June 2018 on reforms of the EU copyright laws (full law proposal). According to a Creative Commons article titled 'Act now to stop the EU’...
user's user avatar
  • 2,983
36 votes
1 answer

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 quote outside sources (unless they are compatible with cc by-sa 4.0) or use images under fair use exceptions in our posts. Creative Commons provides guidance how ...
David Mulder's user avatar
  • 2,054
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
28 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
  • 587
18 votes
1 answer

Do I have to give attribution to SO when using my own content elsewhere?

Content on SE sites is licensed under CC-BY-SA. If I write a question/answer on your sites, do I still have copyright of the text I entered or does SE now hold all copyright to it? Can I put an ...
Tom's user avatar
  • 4,005
17 votes
0 answers

When adding image from Wikimedia Commons, automatically add author/license/link

Many Stack Exchange questions and answers embed images from Wikimedia Commons. It is probably the most used image source here. The good news Thanks to their license, all images from Wikimedia Commons ...
Nicolas Raoul's user avatar
15 votes
1 answer

As a workaround to Imgur being blocked, is there a image hosting site which allows URL uploads and does not violate CC BY-SA 4.0 copyright?

Imgur is blocked in China (and probably in some other countries as well as many workplaces and educational institutions). This is annoying for Chinese users and Chinese.SE in particular. Workaround: ...
Rebecca J. Stones's user avatar
5 votes
2 answers

Publishing a book - "Best programming Q&A" from SO contents?

Is it possible to publish a book made entirely out of SO questions and answers? The idea is to publish the book freely online, and to sell kindle and printed copies on Proper attribution ...
Adam Matan's user avatar
  • 2,555
-1 votes
2 answers

Will we be able to use code from Wikipedia after the Licensing change?

Will we be able to use code snippets from Wikipedia after this proposal is implemented? Of course, we don't use code snippets from Wikipedia that often. I was just wondering.
PyRulez's user avatar
  • 1,524
-14 votes
2 answers

Is a refusal to disassociate deleted posts in compliance with the CC BY-SA license? [closed]

I asked Stack Exchange staff to remove attribution on some of my deleted answers. They suggested I delete my account to remove attribution. I have asked them if they will restore attribution on other ...
user avatar
44 votes
7 answers

How can I keep Stack Overflow clones out of my Google search results?

What is the best way to keep the various Stack Overflow clones and aggregators out of my Google search results? Sites that are not to be named; I'm looking at you. They are seriously messing up my ...
SooDesuNe's user avatar
  • 549
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
17 votes
1 answer

Can I make a YouTube video adapting Stack Overflow content?

There are many interesting questions on Stack Overflow, that have many good answers and many good comments. I want to make an animated YouTube video about a question and some answers to help visual ...
Fee's user avatar
  • 273
15 votes
0 answers

Does the dual license in the pre-2018 Terms of Service allow SE to permit others to redistribute subscriber content outside of CC BY-SA?

I was reading around the topic of the precise details of subscriber-content licensing on SE, and I found (and read more carefully than the previous times I'd seen it) this thread on FOSS.SE from 2017, ...
E.P.'s user avatar
  • 19.4k
11 votes
1 answer

SEDE footer still links to version 3.0 of Creative Commons license

According to Stack Exchange and Stack Overflow have moved to CC BY-SA 4.0, subscriber content is now licensed under version 4.0 of the Creative Commons license. The change is reflected in the footer ...
Glorfindel's user avatar
  • 248k
11 votes
1 answer

Code at Stackoverflow under any license? [duplicate]

Possible Duplicate: Do I have to worry about copyright issues for code posted on StackOverflow? A very basic doubt: the answers that are quoted on SO, do they come under any license? Is it OK(/...
10 votes
2 answers

When SE unilaterally alters an author's name to "user123xxx", isn't it breaching its licence?

A user recently left English.SE in dissatisfaction with other users' behaviour, and he asked SE to delete both his English.SE account and all of the work he had posted to that subsite. But while SE ...
user avatar
10 votes
2 answers

Is Stack Overflow's use of Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (cc-wiki) viral?

The Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license that all Stack Overflow contributions are licensed under states: Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may ...
BRH's user avatar
  • 201
8 votes
2 answers

Do images have to be quoted to meet CC BY-SA 3.0?

So I have this Aviation.SE question about an XKCD comic. I included the image, as well as a proper link back to the XKCD site (a similar question does the same). I've had a user attempt multiple ...
Machavity's user avatar
  • 26.3k
6 votes
1 answer

Data Dump torrent required attribution?

I see in the monthly creative commons data dump these files: content\Export-100110.7z ClearBits.txt Description.txt License.txt However the license.txt only says
user152055's user avatar
5 votes
1 answer

Attribution Required for non-web media

I read the blog post "Attribution Required" by Jeff Atwood. As I understand the post, SE "require[s]" that reusers "Hyperlink directly to the original question", that ...
Damian Yerrick's user avatar
1 vote
1 answer

Is it legal for Stack Exchange to decline post dissociation requests on non-deleted posts?

Note: Not a duplicate of Is a refusal to disassociate deleted posts in compliance with the CC BY-SA license?. As its title says, that question has to do with the case where the post involved was ...
Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog's user avatar
51 votes
2 answers

Can one take the entire Q&A base and move it to a new site?

In the light of all recent moderators and experienced users quitting, I was wondering if anyone is allowed to take the entire Q&A set of a site, and move it to a new site, with new rules? I think ...
Patrick Hofman's user avatar
20 votes
2 answers

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 ...
Ellie Kesselman's user avatar
19 votes
1 answer

Does archival interfere with attribution removal?

There was a question asking about CC BY-SA 3.0's requirement to remove attribute on request. It was brought up that automatic archives may still preserve historical information, including attribution ...
forest distrusts StackExchange's user avatar
18 votes
0 answers

Make it clear that you need to have the right to license any pictures under CC BY-SA

tl;dr: Right now we're not allowed to upload any images we don't own (fair use does not apply on this site, see the link). Let's make this a bit clearer in the image upload form. When you try to ...
David Mulder's user avatar
  • 2,054
18 votes
1 answer

The mobile version of the website does not show the license along with the contributions

The contributors license their work with a creative commons license and more specifically "cc by-sa". This means that the if anybody, e.g. SE, wants to use the work of a contributor then they need to ...
Sextus Empiricus's user avatar
16 votes
2 answers

How can we avoid the pitfalls of CreativeCommons in code snippets?

Creative Commons is a great license for a wiki, but it's not a good software license at all. Is it the case that all code snippets are under the same license as the rest of the text? I commonly say "...
Micah Hainline's user avatar