> First, Stack Overflow contributions are licensed under Creative Commons. So monetizing them is explicitly allowed.
The evolution of any human legal system can be described as follows.
1. Hey guys, here is a simple set of rules we have agreed upon, to make sure there are no conflicts. Please follow them in good faith.
2. 95% of people follow both the letter and spirit of the agreed rules.
3. Some bad actors come in and only comply with the letter of rules, hacking and exploiting the system to their obscene advantage.
4. The complexity of the rules is increased to shut down the bad actors. The new rules increase costs for everyone, good and bad actors.
Repeat steps 2-4 continuously till the system is completely broken and we are all much worse off. The bad actors, "We did nothing wrong, we followed the letter of the law."
What's the conflict? Stack Overflow content was specifically licensed under Creative Commons so that its content can be maximally used and learned from, and it seems to be working successfully in ways not envisioned before.
The evolution of any human legal system can be described as follows.
1. Hey guys, here is a simple set of rules we have agreed upon, to make sure there are no conflicts. Please follow them in good faith.
2. 95% of people follow both the letter and spirit of the agreed rules.
3. Some bad actors come in and only comply with the letter of rules, hacking and exploiting the system to their obscene advantage.
4. The complexity of the rules is increased to shut down the bad actors. The new rules increase costs for everyone, good and bad actors.
Repeat steps 2-4 continuously till the system is completely broken and we are all much worse off. The bad actors, "We did nothing wrong, we followed the letter of the law."