3
$\begingroup$

I was rather distressed to find this book available for sale.

It is just a cut and paste job of hundreds of Astronomy SE questions and answers.

I understand that people are allowed to do this under the terms of the creative commons license, but I rather thought they had to provide links to the original source and links to the user profiles of the people who had actually provided the material.

What can be done about this?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ What an age we live in...these books are even available in Barnes and Noble. $\endgroup$ – called2voyage Apr 11 '18 at 13:01
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ And...I'm in at least four of his books. Not really how I anticipated my words first making it into a publication. $\endgroup$ – called2voyage Apr 11 '18 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ @called2voyage this gives new meaning (or nuance) to the internet is written in ink $\endgroup$ – uhoh Nov 14 '18 at 2:47
3
$\begingroup$

In at least one previous case (book available here), the author - the same person - linked to both the Creative Commons license and gave the attribution required by Stack Exchange. The CMs are okay with this, as it satisfies the legalese and as the person is thought well of on SE. I can't find such attribution in this book, but not all of the pages are viewable, so it may very well be in there. If they've done it before, they've probably done it now - although I can't confirm that.

From a moral standpoint, am I okay with someone else monetizing my work? On the one hand, yeah, it's annoying. On the other, I spent time writing those answers - for free - to help people. I guess the book, too, has the potential to help people. That's the positive light in which I'll try to view it.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It looks like if you actually buy the book, the correct links are in. But looking at the preview link I provided, no such attribution is present. $\endgroup$ – Rob Jeffries Apr 11 '18 at 17:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RobJeffries Well crap, just found out that whether or not the [SE-style] attribution is present doesn't matter, see my answer. $\endgroup$ – called2voyage Apr 13 '18 at 14:07
3
$\begingroup$

I just found out that the Stack Exchange modification to the Creative Commons license to require attribution is not legally valid. So, even without SE's attribution requirements present this reuse of the material is legally not copyright infringement (as long as it follows CC's attribution requirements):

https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/258180/228367

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just have to add your review to the book saying what you think of that then. I have. $\endgroup$ – Rob Jeffries Apr 13 '18 at 14:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .