Hot answers tagged

22

Absolutely. It seems that the people at ubuntuask.com have a different (meaning "wrong") interpretation of the license. It actually says not only that attribution is required, but that attribution is required in the manner specified by the author or licensor, which - on Stack Exchange - includes this: So let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If ...


20

IANAL but, Material posted on Stack Exchange sites is owned by its author (you) and made available under the CC BY-SA Creative Commons license. As the owner of the material, you are free to do anything you want with it elsewhere. You do not have to provide attribution to yourself or mention SE or the CC license when you republish this material. You are the ...


15

Pretty sure this particular one has come up before, but maybe not since it still exists. Please report it using the contact us form at the bottom of every page.


14

Yes. Content you create is yours. There was briefly a clause in the Terms and Conditions that —by my reading— had the inadvertent impact of demanding attribution. I also occasionally write technical blog posts so I shared your concern. I pointed this out and the offending clause was promptly fixed. So again, things you create and submit here remain yours. ...


9

If you want actual permission from Stack Exchange Inc, use the contact form. We can really only give you informal advice. Be polite. Don't hammer the server with hundreds of requests per second, don't leave it going for hours. Consider whether or not you need to index the whole thing or if you could limit it to something specific. And if you're sharing the ...


7

All post content is available under CC-BY-SA. But I disagree slightly with the spirit of muru's post. You can add additional licenses to your posts. If a post declares its content to be available under an additional license, that is just dual-licensing. The reader can choose between the stated on and CC-BY-SA. This is just the same concept as if the writer ...


3

In addition to not providing any links of any kind for attribution, that site also doesn't correctly state author names. I don't just mean they don't link to authors' profiles. On posts where one Ask Ubuntu user created an answer, and the most recent edit was by some other Ask Ubuntu user, that site gives the display name of the editor; as far as I can see, ...


2

I don't know. On one side: Is a legal question answerable if you're not asking where it's legal? Is it canonically answerable by anybody but a lawyer practising in that area? As it stands, those assertions require somebody who is licensed to practice law in every legal municipal in the world. But as you say, we have coped with with a number of legal ...


1

All content posted to Stack Exchange, including code, is licensed CC-BY-SA. If you "declare" another license on your post, and that license is incompatible with CC-BY-SA, you're in violation of Stack Exchange's terms of service. CC is not a good license for code, but it is what it is. ... then person B steals it and publishes it as if they were the owner ...


1

Each should be assessed individually. Questions flat-out asking 'Is this legal?' are soliciting legal opinions and should be closed as either off-topic (As a legal matter, not an Ubuntu matter) or too localized (Legal where? And, legal for you does not mean legal for everyone, forever). If it's something simple, and you can look up a definitive ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible