Skip to main content
Open Source

Return to Question

https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272956/ says "delayed indefinitely" which cannot be accurately described as an accomplished fact
Source Link

Everybody knows that you shouldn't use a CC BY-SA license on your code. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. What I don't know or understand is why. I can't seem to find any information explaining this.

I contribute as both an asker and answerer on Code Review Stack Exchange. Since SE asks us to license our contributions under CC BY-SA, I'd like to know the implications this has on code I post there. Most of my code is released under GPL3 or MIT otherwise. I know by posting it on SE I'm dual licensing, but what exactly am I agreeing to?

  1. Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?
  2. What implications does dual licensing have for these (sometimes quite large) sections of code have from my projects?

Update: Stack Exchange updatedproposed an update to their terms of service in regards to code licensing in late 2015/early 2016. but that change is "delayed indefinitely"

Everybody knows that you shouldn't use a CC BY-SA license on your code. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. What I don't know or understand is why. I can't seem to find any information explaining this.

I contribute as both an asker and answerer on Code Review Stack Exchange. Since SE asks us to license our contributions under CC BY-SA, I'd like to know the implications this has on code I post there. Most of my code is released under GPL3 or MIT otherwise. I know by posting it on SE I'm dual licensing, but what exactly am I agreeing to?

  1. Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?
  2. What implications does dual licensing have for these (sometimes quite large) sections of code have from my projects?

Update: Stack Exchange updated their terms of service in regards to code licensing in late 2015/early 2016.

Everybody knows that you shouldn't use a CC BY-SA license on your code. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. What I don't know or understand is why. I can't seem to find any information explaining this.

I contribute as both an asker and answerer on Code Review Stack Exchange. Since SE asks us to license our contributions under CC BY-SA, I'd like to know the implications this has on code I post there. Most of my code is released under GPL3 or MIT otherwise. I know by posting it on SE I'm dual licensing, but what exactly am I agreeing to?

  1. Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?
  2. What implications does dual licensing have for these (sometimes quite large) sections of code have from my projects?

Stack Exchange proposed an update to their terms of service in regards to code licensing in late 2015/early 2016 but that change is "delayed indefinitely"

edited tags
Link
curiousdannii
  • 8k
  • 1
  • 30
  • 55

Everybody knows that you shouldn't use a CC BY-SA license on your code. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. What I don't know or understand is why. I can't seem to find any information explaining this.

I contribute as both an asker and answerer on Code Review Stack Exchange. Since SE asks us to license our contributions under CC BY-SA, I'd like to know the implications this has on code I post there. Most of my code is released under GPL3 or MIT otherwise. I know by posting it on SE I'm dual licensing, but what exactly am I agreeing to?

  1. Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?
  2. What implications does dual licensing have for these (sometimes quite large) sections of code have from my projects?

Update: Stack Exchange updated their terms of service in regards to code licensing in late 2015/early 2016.

Everybody knows that you shouldn't use a CC BY-SA license on your code. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. What I don't know or understand is why. I can't seem to find any information explaining this.

I contribute as both an asker and answerer on Code Review Stack Exchange. Since SE asks us to license our contributions under CC BY-SA, I'd like to know the implications this has on code I post there. Most of my code is released under GPL3 or MIT otherwise. I know by posting it on SE I'm dual licensing, but what exactly am I agreeing to?

  1. Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?
  2. What implications does dual licensing have for these (sometimes quite large) sections of code have from my projects?

Update: Stack Exchange updated their terms of service in regards to code licensing in late 2015/early 2016.

Everybody knows that you shouldn't use a CC BY-SA license on your code. Even the Creative Commons folk recommend against it. What I don't know or understand is why. I can't seem to find any information explaining this.

I contribute as both an asker and answerer on Code Review Stack Exchange. Since SE asks us to license our contributions under CC BY-SA, I'd like to know the implications this has on code I post there. Most of my code is released under GPL3 or MIT otherwise. I know by posting it on SE I'm dual licensing, but what exactly am I agreeing to?

  1. Why is CC BY-SA discouraged for code?
  2. What implications does dual licensing have for these (sometimes quite large) sections of code have from my projects?

Update: Stack Exchange updated their terms of service in regards to code licensing in late 2015/early 2016.

replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
Source Link
Loading
added 248 characters in body
Source Link
RubberDuck
  • 5.7k
  • 2
  • 22
  • 35
Loading
retagged
Link
unor
  • 5.8k
  • 1
  • 27
  • 58
Loading
Post Reopened by ArtOfCode
Post Closed as "Duplicate" by ArtOfCode
added 8 characters in body; edited title
Source Link
ArtOfCode
  • 9.7k
  • 2
  • 31
  • 72
Loading
edited title
Link
RubberDuck
  • 5.7k
  • 2
  • 22
  • 35
Loading
Source Link
RubberDuck
  • 5.7k
  • 2
  • 22
  • 35
Loading

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /