SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In the beginning, pop culture wiki TV Tropes licensed its content with the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license for free content.
When Google pulled out its AdSense revenue because of... let's call it NSFW fan fiction, TV Tropes changed its guidelines to forbid tropes about mature content. In response to this move, two forks were eventually created. The admins disliked this move so much that they changed its license notice to the Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike version, despite their site not having requested copyright rights from their users. Only later they added a clause to their Terms of use page requiring all contributors to grant the site irrevocable, exclusive ownership of their edits.
I suppose the morale of the story is, if you contributed to TV Tropes before summer 2012, you should know they're distributing your content under a license that you didn't give them permission to use.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 16 2014, @04:09PM
You seem oddly preoccupied with "loli" matters (I am inferring from context what that means).
I am affronted at TVTropes's violation of its contributors' copyright, but see nothing wrong with them policing pedophilia as stringently as they want. And frankly it always seemed to me that Lolita itself got a strange pass from society at large. I guess good writing (or good directing in Polanski's case) counts for far more than it should.
(Yes, yes, I know, one is literary fiction and the other is a director anally raping a 14 year old, so apples and rapists, sorry.)