0

On StackExchange there are two conflicting pieces of information about the requirement of attribution. How should it be done?

From https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/06/25/attribution-required/

So let me clarify what we mean by attribution. If you republish this content, we require that you:

  1. Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow or the Stack Exchange network in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.

  2. Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)

  3. Show the author names for every question and answer

  4. Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username)

But this first point does not occur in the license text and in that text a different way of contribution is described.

From https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

If You Distribute, or Publicly Perform the Work or any Adaptations or Collections, You must, unless a request has been made pursuant to Section 4(a), keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of the Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties (e.g., a sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for attribution ("Attribution Parties") in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or by other reasonable means, the name of such party or parties; (ii) the title of the Work if supplied; (iii) to the extent reasonably practicable, the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work, unless such URI does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the Work; and (iv) , consistent with Ssection 3(b), in the case of an Adaptation, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Adaptation (e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"). The credit required by this Section 4(c) may be implemented in any reasonable manner

the 4.0 version

  1. identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated)

  2. a copyright notice;a notice that refers to this Public License;

  3. a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties

  4. URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable

There is no "attribution parties" anymore.


Is SE/SO such attribution party, or 'others designated to receive attribution'? It is not mentioned in the license that is agreed upon in the terms of service (or at least those terms of service are not clear about it, an ambiguity, which I guess should, end up in favor of the licensor and not the licensee)

https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service#licensing

You agree that any and all content...is perpetually and irrevocably licensed ...on a ... basis pursuant to Creative Commons licensing terms (CC-BY-SA),

And SE/SO is not allowed to copy the content (which was shared with a cc by-sa license agreed upon according to those terms) and publish under a more restrictive license (restrictive is requiring the visual indication that content is from Stack Overflow or Stack Exchange).

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.