Return to Answer

If the answer is contains a substantial original contribution of ready-to-use code, then attribution should be required by default.

If the answer contains a substantial original contribution of ready-to-use code, then attribution should be required by default.

1. Post code in a Stack Overflow answer
2. Wait for the code to be incorporated into some software project
3. Sue
4. Win
5. Profit!

Let's take a hypothetical extreme example: someone publishes an O'Reilly-style cookbook consisting of code snippets extracted from Stack Overflow. Only the code blocks are taken; all of the surrounding text is reworded. No attribution is given. How would you feel about that?

1. Post code in a Stack Overflow answer
2. Wait for the code to be incorporated into some software project
3. Sue or extort
4. Win or settle
5. Profit!

Let's take a hypothetical extreme example: someone publishes an O'Reilly-style cookbook consisting of code snippets extracted from Stack Overflow, Code Review, PPCG, …. Only the code blocks are taken; all of the surrounding text is reworded. No attribution is given. How would you feel about that?

I'm not convinced that there was a serious problem to begin with, but I'm pretty sure that this proposal will cause more problems than it would solve.

I suppose that the rationale for the change is to protect users of Stack Overflow answers from (hopefully hypothetical) copyright trolls whose modus operandi is:

1. Post code in a Stack Overflow answer
2. Wait for the code to be incorporated into some software project
3. Sue
4. Win
5. Profit!

To preempt that low-probability, high-stakes terroristic threat, we're being faced with a proposal that imposes huge costs on all Stack Exchange communities.