Christophe Strobbe commented:

What licence should the blog content have? I don't see a licence anywhere. Do the authors choose the licence for each individual article? BTW, Stack Exchange uses Creative Commons cc by-sa 3.0.

The platform the blog is hosted on (Medium) offers writers the option to change the license under which they are releasing their post (defaults to full copyright/all rights reserved).

Should we enforce a licensing requirement? Or should we leave the licensing up to the writer's discretion?


I'd like to leave licensing up to the writer, because I don't see a significant need to have a specific licensing scheme. (Not a lawyer, but) I don't think it is necessary that blog posts abide by the same license as StackExchange: fair use still applies.

  1. I don't see the need to specify a specific licence for the entire blog, but I recommend that each author explicitly chooses a licence. Unfortunately, I don't see a licence on my first post, even though I explicitly chose a licence.

  2. When reusing content from other sources, copyright and licence info should clearly be mentioned. This applies to excerpts from LLSE contributions (should we use any), logos and other media (images, diagrams, etc.) from other sites, etc. For example, the Duolingo review should properly attribute the Duolingo logo to Duolingo (see the section "Trademarks" in Duolingo's Terms and Conditions and should add copyright information to the tables and diagrams in the post (if they were borrowed from elsewhere).

This may sound like overkill to some people, but after some recent experiences with an online course, my attitude with copyright is more than ever better safe than sorry.

You must log in to answer this question.

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