SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the it's-more-fun-when-you-write-the-rules dept.
Popular culture website Wikia originally hosted its user-contributed content under a free, sharealike Commercial Commons license (CC-BY-SA). At least as soon as 2003, some specific wikis decided to use the non-commercial CC-BY-NC license instead: hey, this license supposedly protects the authors, and anyone is free to choose how they want to license their work anyway, right?
However, in late 2012 Wikia added to its License terms of service a retroactive clause for all its non-commercial content, granting Wikia an exclusive right to use this content in commercial contexts, effectively making all CC-BY-NC content dual-licensed. And today, Wikia is publicizing a partnership with Sony to display Wikia content on Smart TVs, a clear commercial use.
A similar event happened at TV Tropes when the site owners single-handedly changed the site's copyright notice from ShareAlike to the incompatible NonCommercial, without notifying nor requesting consent from its contributors. Is this the ultimate fate of popular wikis? Do Creative Commons licenses hold any weight for community websites?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by dbot on Thursday May 29 2014, @05:57PM
That would be pretty detrimental to what people are trying to do here, I would think.
I haven't gone back, and don't intend to. Would love to have your(any/all) discussion take place here exclusively.
If you're choosing to use /., that's fine, but to promote people to go elsewhere is counter productive.