Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #37003 > unrolled thread

Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow cragkhit@gmail.com - 2017-07-26 14:50 -0700
    Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow j4n bur53 <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2017-07-27 16:20 +0200
      Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 08:10 -0700
        Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow cragkhit@gmail.com - 2017-07-29 05:29 -0700
          Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-07-29 05:57 -0700
          Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-07-29 18:35 -0400
          Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 05:11 -0700
            Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-07-31 19:12 -0400
      Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-07-27 20:13 -0400
        Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow cragkhit@gmail.com - 2017-07-29 05:31 -0700
      Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow cragkhit@gmail.com - 2017-07-29 05:19 -0700
        Re: Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-07-29 05:30 -0700

#37003 — Outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow

Dear programmers,

I’m a PhD student in software engineering group at UCL, London. My research is on code duplication and their effects on Internet-driven software development. I and my supervisor (Dr. Jens Krinke) are currently working on a study to understand the issue of outdated and license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow. 

Since you are active Java programmers, would you mind helping me with this not-for-profit study by taking our surveys? Your input will be valuable to our study. Anyway, I totally understand if you find post as a spam and please feel free to just ignore it.

The survey results will be used only for academic research purposes and we plan to release the results to Stack Overflow and in the form of academic papers and presentations. I hope my findings will raise awareness and might potentially improve the quality of code in Stack Overflow answers in the future.

If you have ever used code snippets from Stack Overflow in your own code, could you please answer the following questionnaire?: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc29onT3z1FJQ9N4Jvq-DFSMrtuGv_4s9X5lXLHSK8Z8gmqcg/viewform?usp=sf_link

If you have ever used code snippets in an *answer* you posted on Stack Overflow, could you please also answer the following questionnaire?: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfkFupb6flIXbGKv1hA4i071KTIadl5FQaJDz0ZU59tdcZMNg/viewform?usp=sf_link

It is completely anonymous and has 11 & 15 questions and should only take about 5-7 minutes to complete. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

This research project has been approved by the designated ethics officer in the Computer Science Department at UCL.

Thank you,
Chaiyong Ragkhitwetsagul
CREST, Dept. of Computer Science
University College London
www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/C.Ragkhitwetsagul

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#37004

Good luck in publishing on SO. To the best of my knowledge
SO is a Q&A site, and not a publishing site. Somebody seems
to be profoundly confused here.

BTW: They have a documentation beta, but their aim here
is also not papers and presentations. See here:
https://stackoverflow.com/documentation

cragkhit@gmail.com schrieb:
 > The survey results will be used only for academic research purposes
 > and we plan to release the results to Stack Overflow and in the
 > form of academic papers and presentations.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37005

On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 10:20:20 AM UTC-4, j4n bur53 wrote:
> Good luck in publishing on SO. To the best of my knowledge
> SO is a Q&A site, and not a publishing site. Somebody seems
> to be profoundly confused here.
> 
> BTW: They have a documentation beta, but their aim here
> is also not papers and presentations. See here:
> https://stackoverflow.com/documentation
> 

I was planning to ignore the message because it doesn't make sense.
1) What exactly does "release the results to Stack Overflow" mean?
2) What do they expect to be done about "outdated code snippets"?  Someone should actively maintain little pieces of code written to solve specific issues for years to come?
3) What sort of licenses could these code snippets be violating?  How do they expect to verify that?

No one cares about the quality of code posted to answer a specific question years ago.  If you have a current question and the answer works for you, great.  If it doesn't, keep looking or post a new question.  It's not intended to be a code repository to do your work for you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37023

On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 4:10:19 PM UTC+1, Eric Douglas wrote:
> On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 10:20:20 AM UTC-4, j4n bur53 wrote:
> > Good luck in publishing on SO. To the best of my knowledge
> > SO is a Q&A site, and not a publishing site. Somebody seems
> > to be profoundly confused here.
> > 
> > BTW: They have a documentation beta, but their aim here
> > is also not papers and presentations. See here:
> > https://stackoverflow.com/documentation
> > 
> 
> I was planning to ignore the message because it doesn't make sense.
> 1) What exactly does "release the results to Stack Overflow" mean?
> 2) What do they expect to be done about "outdated code snippets"?  Someone should actively maintain little pieces of code written to solve specific issues for years to come?
> 3) What sort of licenses could these code snippets be violating?  How do they expect to verify that?
> 
> No one cares about the quality of code posted to answer a specific question years ago.  If you have a current question and the answer works for you, great.  If it doesn't, keep looking or post a new question.  It's not intended to be a code repository to do your work for you.

Hi Eric, 

1) We plan to release the findings from this survey to the Stack Overflow community (possibly as a technical report). This is because we received some feedbacks from SO users that we previously released the survey to that they would like the know our findings.
2) We do not expect the poster of the code snippet to actively maintaining the code. However, we believe it would be better to have some mechanism in place on Stack Overflow that could flag if the code snippet has been copied from somewhere else and it is already outdated (and also with conflicting license).
3) Stack Overflow applies CC BY-SA 3.0 license to both text and code snippets on the posts. The CC BY-SA 3.0 is quite permissive. So, for example, if I copy a code snippet from an open source project that has GPL license but I do not include the original license in the copied snippet, this snippet may appear to be protected by CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of its original GPL license. We have performed another study using code clone detection tools to detect SO snippets that were copied from 111 open source projects. We found at least 357 of them violate their original licenses.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37026

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 8:30:00 AM UTC-4, crag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Eric, 
> 
> 1) We plan to release the findings from this survey to the Stack Overflow community (possibly as a technical report). This is because we received some feedbacks from SO users that we previously released the survey to that they would like the know our findings.
> 2) We do not expect the poster of the code snippet to actively maintaining the code. However, we believe it would be better to have some mechanism in place on Stack Overflow that could flag if the code snippet has been copied from somewhere else and it is already outdated (and also with conflicting license).
> 3) Stack Overflow applies CC BY-SA 3.0 license to both text and code snippets on the posts. The CC BY-SA 3.0 is quite permissive. So, for example, if I copy a code snippet from an open source project that has GPL license but I do not include the original license in the copied snippet, this snippet may appear to be protected by CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of its original GPL license. We have performed another study using code clone detection tools to detect SO snippets that were copied from 111 open source projects. We found at least 357 of them violate their original licenses.

I would advise that you look into an application of the Fair Use laws in
various countries.  These allow me, in a for-profit endeavor even, to
use up to 30 seconds of something that is copyrighted in my production,
without requesting use rights, or without requiring any type of royalty.

Surely there must be something similar related to open source endeavors
that would override your entire project.

People don't typically post the entire code base for GIMP when they are
including a 5-line snippet of an algorithm taken from the GIMP library.
And in addition, most places where I've seen code referenced like that
on Stack Overflow, they have given attribution to the original project.
They cite by link and name where they got the code, with the purpose
and intent of their citing that link to be giving the reader the oppor-
tunity to look at the larger source and derive more information for
their answer if needed ... i.e., to better help people.

I was really surprised when I read this post the other day.  I didn't
reply at that time, but I stuck it in the back of my mind.  And then
today with these follow-ups ... I think you are notably on a wrong
path.  You are serving wrong needs.  You are trying to address the
wrong problems.  And you are going to end up harming people with your
goals.

I wish your endeavor great failure.  And I pray for you to re-examine
your purpose and intent and come away from this disaster and pick a
real purpose in life, one that will actually help people, and address
the needs of billions rather than hundreds.

Look around you.  Look into the eyes of the people in this online
community.  Look into their needs and serve those people, not the
ones who erect artificial barriers around things so they can exert
monopoly rights which would not otherwise exist.  Please.

Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37030

On 7/29/2017 8:29 AM, cragkhit@gmail.com wrote:
> 1) We plan to release the findings from this survey to the Stack
> Overflow community (possibly as a technical report). This is because
> we received some feedbacks from SO users that we previously released
> the survey to that they would like the know our findings.

SO is for questions not "technical reports".

> 2) We do
> not expect the poster of the code snippet to actively maintaining the
> code. However, we believe it would be better to have some mechanism
> in place on Stack Overflow that could flag if the code snippet has
> been copied from somewhere else and it is already outdated (and also
> with conflicting license).

Welcome to the internet.

In general the internet does not have any ways of flagging
obsolete or copyright infringing content.

SO as one of the few places on the internet actually have a way
to do that. You can add a new comment explaining the problem.

That is core SO functionality.

>                            3) Stack Overflow applies CC BY-SA 3.0
> license to both text and code snippets on the posts. The CC BY-SA 3.0
> is quite permissive. So, for example, if I copy a code snippet from
> an open source project that has GPL license but I do not include the
> original license in the copied snippet, this snippet may appear to be
> protected by CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of its original GPL license. We
> have performed another study using code clone detection tools to
> detect SO snippets that were copied from 111 open source projects. We
> found at least 357 of them violate their original licenses.

You may not be aware. But the top lawyers and top judges in the US often
discuss what is copyright infringement and what is not in court.

So you believing that you can make an authoritative determination
shows a serious lack of understanding of the complexity of the
problem.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37032

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 8:30:00 AM UTC-4, crag...@gmail.com wrote:
> 2) We do not expect the poster of the code snippet to actively maintaining the code. However, we believe it would be better to have some mechanism in place on Stack Overflow that could flag if the code snippet has been copied from somewhere else and it is already outdated (and also with conflicting license).

Is there a code crawler that tells you any code posted in a forum is an exact match for syntax of code somewhere else on the internet, possibly with different variable names and such?  Often times there are only so many ways to write a specific function, how would you know it was copied?  You really think someone posting their source on the internet cares if someone copies it somewhere else?

> 3) Stack Overflow applies CC BY-SA 3.0 license to both text and code snippets on the posts. The CC BY-SA 3.0 is quite permissive. So, for example, if I copy a code snippet from an open source project that has GPL license but I do not include the original license in the copied snippet, this snippet may appear to be protected by CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of its original GPL license. We have performed another study using code clone detection tools to detect SO snippets that were copied from 111 open source projects. We found at least 357 of them violate their original licenses.

Doesn't the GPL license say anyone is free to copy their code and use in house?  Anyone who cares about license violations likely already has an army of lawyers searching for violations, and anyone using an open license isn't going to care unless someone is putting it in code they're selling.  All the code I've written is only used for the company's own internal application.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37038

On 7/31/2017 8:11 AM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 8:30:00 AM UTC-4, crag...@gmail.com wrote:

>> 3) Stack Overflow applies CC BY-SA 3.0 license to both text and
>> code snippets on the posts. The CC BY-SA 3.0 is quite permissive.
>> So, for example, if I copy a code snippet from an open source
>> project that has GPL license but I do not include the original
>> license in the copied snippet, this snippet may appear to be
>> protected by CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of its original GPL license. We
>> have performed another study using code clone detection tools to
>> detect SO snippets that were copied from 111 open source projects.
>> We found at least 357 of them violate their original licenses.
> Doesn't the GPL license say anyone is free to copy their code and use
> in house?  Anyone who cares about license violations likely already
> has an army of lawyers searching for violations, and anyone using an
> open license isn't going to care unless someone is putting it in code
> they're selling.  All the code I've written is only used for the
> company's own internal application.
Using GPL code for inhouse only is rather unproblematic.

But using GPL embedded in something distributed to external
entities comes with certain obligations.

SO snippets may also be used in the latter case.

GPL license does not prevent the user of the code from
selling the resulting product for money - they just need
to comply with the GPL license.

And FSF do enforce GPL terms in general.

But I suspect they may not try and enforce it for a single
code snippet.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37015

On 7/27/2017 10:20 AM, j4n bur53 wrote:
> Good luck in publishing on SO. To the best of my knowledge
> SO is a Q&A site, and not a publishing site. Somebody seems
> to be profoundly confused here.
> 
> BTW: They have a documentation beta, but their aim here
> is also not papers and presentations. See here:
> https://stackoverflow.com/documentation
> 
> cragkhit@gmail.com schrieb:
>> The survey results will be used only for academic research purposes
>> and we plan to release the results to Stack Overflow and in the
>> form of academic papers and presentations.
> 

There are bigger problems than this.

The first rule of surveys is to validate your audience.  Asking in a
usenet newsgroup doesn't do that.  And without a known audience, the
results are worthless.

Either the "student" has absolutely no idea what he's doing or he's not
really a student and trying to collect emails or similar.  No reputable
PhD program I know of would accept such a "survey".

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37025

On Friday, July 28, 2017 at 1:12:30 AM UTC+1, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 7/27/2017 10:20 AM, j4n bur53 wrote:
> > Good luck in publishing on SO. To the best of my knowledge
> > SO is a Q&A site, and not a publishing site. Somebody seems
> > to be profoundly confused here.
> > 
> > BTW: They have a documentation beta, but their aim here
> > is also not papers and presentations. See here:
> > https://stackoverflow.com/documentation
> > 
> > cragkhit@gmail.com schrieb:
> >> The survey results will be used only for academic research purposes
> >> and we plan to release the results to Stack Overflow and in the
> >> form of academic papers and presentations.
> > 
> 
> There are bigger problems than this.
> 
> The first rule of surveys is to validate your audience.  Asking in a
> usenet newsgroup doesn't do that.  And without a known audience, the
> results are worthless.
> 
> Either the "student" has absolutely no idea what he's doing or he's not
> really a student and trying to collect emails or similar.  No reputable
> PhD program I know of would accept such a "survey".
> 
> -- 
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> jstucklex@attglobal.net
> ==================

Hi Jerry, 

You're right. We have defined multiple target groups and separated the survey accordingly so that we can compare the results.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37022

On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 3:20:20 PM UTC+1, j4n bur53 wrote:
> Good luck in publishing on SO. To the best of my knowledge
> SO is a Q&A site, and not a publishing site. Somebody seems
> to be profoundly confused here.
> 
> BTW: They have a documentation beta, but their aim here
> is also not papers and presentations. See here:
> https://stackoverflow.com/documentation
> 
> cragkhit@gmail.com schrieb:
>  > The survey results will be used only for academic research purposes
>  > and we plan to release the results to Stack Overflow and in the
>  > form of academic papers and presentations.

Hi j4n! We are not going to publish on Stack Overflow. We plan to release our findings to the Stack Overflow community (possibly as a technical report or similar kind of document). Any form of publication from this survey will be submitted to a software engineering journal or conference.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37024

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 8:19:20 AM UTC-4, crag...@gmail.com wrote:
> We are not going to publish on Stack Overflow. We plan to release our
> findings to the Stack Overflow community (possibly as a technical report
> or similar kind of document). Any form of publication from this survey
> will be submitted to a software engineering journal or conference.

What are you hoping to find?  People have released the code they post on
Stack Overflow as a gesture of good faith and good will toward their
fellow human beings.  What type of legal lasso are you attempting to draw
these well-meaning, helpful human beings in to?

Are you hoping to figure out some new revenue model to charge people for
their contributions to Stack Overflow?  Are you looking to force people
to cite the fact that they received a 5-line snippet to address a specific
syntax need of something they haven't yet been taught by a book or through
a co-worker showing them?

What are you goals here?  "I hope my findings will raise awareness and
might potentially improve the quality of code in Stack Overflow answers
in the future" is rather vague under the colorization of "Outdated and
license-violating Java code snippets on Stack Overflow."

-----
In my best initial assessment of what you've provided my reply would be:

    You should be ashamed of yourself, PhD student Chaiyong
    Ragkhitwetsagul.  Kindly peek your eyes up out of those books
    and look around to your fellow human being and serve their needs
    first, and not the needs of monopoly-rights entities like copyright
    and patent holders, as these serve to strangle people rather than
    aid them at a ratio of about 500M:1.

    You should be helping the mass of people, and not niche entities'
    self-interests.

    Spend a little more time on the fundamental "philosophy" aspect
    of your PhD program.

Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web