Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Comments on Bug or license issue with imported post from SE?

Parent

Bug or license issue with imported post from SE?

+3
−0

This post is a blatant copy of this SE post. It lacks the little "hamburger icon" that's supposed to pop up when a post is imported by staff. So either there's some glitch here with missing hamburger, or the poster imported the post manually.

In case of manual import, could this be a licensing issue or is it ok to copy/paste posts like this? Since no attribution is given to the SE post and we don't even know if it's the same user.

Just asking here to make sure that we don't get in trouble with SE and get accused of scraping their sites. The image link even goes to stack.imgur.com.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+1
−0

Thank you for raising this question.

This post didn't use Codidact's import script; it was manually copied here. If the person is the same user as on the other site, that's kosher -- you always own your own work and can repost it anywhere else without any licensing considerations. While not definitive, a quick peek at the user profile on the SE question tells me that this user isn't participating on SE now and thus might have more reason to come here.

If the user who posted it here is not the same person as the author of the post there, then this would be a copyright violation, not a license violation. We're not equipped to do copyright investigations; if someone claiming to be the SE user comes to us and says "I'm not the one who reposted on your site and I object", then we'll investigate.[1] The simplest assumption is that it's the same person, and we can operate on that assumption until we have reason to doubt it.

The special icon and attribution for imports are for when we import somebody else's content. We're allowed to do that so long as we follow the attribution requirements of the license. The icon isn't required but is something we added to help people distinguish these questions if they want to.


  1. SE takes the same approach to possible copyright violations: it's up to the wronged user to complain; they don't investigate everything that could be a violation. It wouldn't be reasonable of them to demand more from us than they do themselves with a much bigger staff and hundreds of millions of dollars of venture capital. ↩︎

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (3 comments)
General comments
Lundin‭ wrote about 4 years ago

I thought SE owned the copyright to everything posted on their network as per some Terms of Service?

Monica Cellio‭ wrote about 4 years ago

@Lundin no, authors own the copyright, and must grant SE an irrevocable license to use the material in the ways defined in their TOS. You're not giving up your ownership by posting there (or here).

Jirka Hanika‭ wrote about 4 years ago

@Lundin - the license that authors issue to SE is a non-exclusive one. (Like here.)