You may have seen The MIT License – Clarity on Using Code on Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange and A New Code License: The MIT, this time with Attribution Required.

But I'm no legal expert, and I'm confused what the changes would include. What's the difference between CC-By-SA and MIT, and what about with attribution?


Broadly speaking, the difference is the "sharealike" clause of CC-BY-SA. Any derivative of a CC-BY-SA work must itself be licensed CC-BY-SA, whereas a derivative of an "MIT with attribution" work can be under any license the author wants.

There are a number of other differences in the fine print (eg. CC forbids DRM, where MIT doesn't), but that's the big one.

  • Do any of them address parents? I remember GPL does, how about MIT and CC-BY-SA?
    – Viktor
    Jan 15 '16 at 1:00
  • @Viktor, MIT says nothing about patents; CC-BY-SA merely notes that the license covers copyright only, not patent or trademark rights.
    – Mark
    Jan 15 '16 at 1:20

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.