30

Actually, on further reflection, I don't think this is OK at all. I'm all for re-use of the Creative Commons content that I post on this site, including commercial use if people can find ways to monetize it that are compatible with its licensing conditions. However, I'm not OK with reuse of that content in ways which infringe the attribution requirements (i....


23

I'm the creator of these books. Firstly I should say it was not my intention to break any copyright or cause any ill feeling among contributors. When initially evaluating submitting the books to Amazon/Google/iTunes I checked the terms of the license and checked with Stack Overflow and believe I did everything needed to comply. The eBooks and physical books ...


13

As long as these "books" meet the attribution requirements of the Creative Commons license all SE content is licensed under, i.e. link to the post and author of everything they copy, this is perfectly legal. See also this mother meta post.


10

That depends exclusively on the policies of the journal. Most journals have a policy that excludes some forms of previously published content, but what counts as 'publishing' on that account varies very much from journal to journal. Some venues take that to mean exclusively publication of exactly that material in a peer-reviewed journal; others use broad ...


7

This seems like a lot of work to ask the moderators to do. However there's nothing to stop you from doing it if you think it's a worthwhile undertaking. I have to say that it's not obvious to me that this would be especially useful.


4

I can see that the CC-BY-SA license allows people to produce this kind of thing, but I don't think that excuses the fact that you can go to google books and read these Q+A without being aware that the content has been stripped from elsewhere, with no obvious indication of the CC-BY-SA license and with no proper links to the original source of the material.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible