[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Stack Overflow and copyrightability of small snippets

Many packages include code snippets from, or based on, Stack Overflow answers [0].

Stack Overflow user-posted content is under CC-BY-SA (the version depending on its age) [1], which is a libre license but usually not the license these packages claim to be under. Also, attribution is usually provided as a link only, not the longer form Stack Overflow say they require [2] (though whether they legally can require that is disputed [3]).

Content is owned by the user posting it, not Stack Overflow. It is unclear whether asking a user to dual-license content is considered appropriate behaviour.

Small snippets may not be copyrightable, but it is unclear what counts as "small" in this context; a 9 line function has been a subject of litigation [4]. There have been multiple discussions of this on Stack Overflow meta [5]. I am in England, which has been said to have an unusually low threshold for copyrightability [6].

As a packager, how do I decide which ones are long enough to require action, and of what kind? - Remove them and write a replacement? Risks breaking things (e.g. because I'm not sure exactly what the snippet is supposed to do) and/or still being similar enough to be an illegal copy (because I had to look closely at it to determine that). - Mark the package "License: (upstream license) and maybe CC-BY-SA" (is there a better syntax for that?) and report them upstream without a patch? Also add the full [2]-form attribution (which might actually take more time than rewriting)?

[0] codesearch says 10988 occurrences of "stackoverflow.com" in 3036 packages. Examples:
[1] https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/344491/an-update-on-creative-commons-licensing
[2] https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/06/25/attribution-required/
[3] https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/209250/stack-exchange-should-stop-using-the-creative-commons-logo [4] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/05/oracle-to-pursue-longshot-claim-for-copyright-damages/
[5] e.g.
[6] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_Kingdom#Threshold_of_originality

Reply to: