Can we do something about sites copying content from Super User?

Question

I know this isn't ethical, but is there anything we can do about other sites copying from SU?

Any information about the AsyncMapLite Trojan?

http://answerleaks.com/any-information-asyncmaplite-trojan/superuser/321635

Answer 1

Questions & Answers are licensed under Creative Commons Wiki with Attribution Required license.

As Jeff had written:

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

• Visually indicate that the content is from Stack Overflow, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User in some way. It doesn’t have to be obnoxious; a discreet text blurb is fine.
• Hyperlink directly to the original question on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12345)
• Show the author names for every question and answer
• Hyperlink each author name directly back to their user profile page on the source site (e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/users/12345/username). Furthermore, the links must not be nofollowed.

Since Answer Leaks is respecting all the above conditions, it is abiding by the user contribution license and not doing anything illegal.

As Jeff mentions:

I hope that clears up any confusion — feel free to remix and reuse to your heart’s content, as long as a good faith effort is made to attribute the content!

Answer 2

That particular site manages to meet all the attribution requirements for creative commons licensed work from Stack Exchange.

On the page you linked they hit the nail on:

• Indicate the source of the text

• Link directly back to the question

  This question and answers originated from superuser.com

• Show the author name

• Link direct to each author's profile

  Question by WinWin

Not only that, but the links aren't rel="nofollow" as well. Another good mark.

And the bit from the blog post:

This is about the spirit of fair attribution. Attribution to the website, and more importantly, to the individuals who so generously contributed their time to create that content in the first place!

Anyway, I hope that clears up any confusion — feel free to remix and reuse to your heart’s content, as long as a good faith effort is made to attribute the content!

Answer 3

Bear in mind that the content on the entire Stack Exchange network is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution - Share Alike license, so others are allowed to copy and reuse the content as long as they attribute it to the source correctly.

The team have previously defined exactly what they expect of someone reusing the data to do:

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, Meta Stack Overflow, Server Fault, or Super User 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)

By “directly”, I mean each hyperlink must point directly to our domain in standard HTML visible even with JavaScript disabled, and not use a tinyurl or any other form of obfuscation or redirection. Furthermore, the links must not be nofollowed.

The page you've referenced appears to do all four, and I can't see any nofollow on the links, so to me this appears to be a valid reuse of the source question.

---

Here is the Meta Stack Overflow question that covers attribution issues (what I've said here mostly repeats that). The second answer there can be edited to add in any site you find that is breaking these rules (otherwise, consider emailing the team or posting on meta).