Re: The end of stackoverflow?

Don Y wrote:

Don wrote:

It's feasible for the fine print of social sites similar to
Stackoverflow to stipulate all rights to user content belong to the
website owner. The quid pro quo is the owner's out-of-pocket expenses to
host the site.
>
Everything comes at a price. And this perfectly illustrates why people
absolutely must host their own websites in order to protect their
rights.

>
Litigation is what will protect your rights; merely hosting a site
(that can be archived and reused at a later date by any number of
visitors) only controls what that site will PUBLISH at some instant
in time.
>
Can you prevent a 'bot from scraping your site and using that
content to "educate a visitor"?  *Train* an AI??

Both 'bots and litigation are separate topics.

My comments pertain to rights retention. After you sign away your
rights, nothing's left to litigate.

If it helps, think of it this way: a website's owner is legally entitled
to rip you off when you sign away your rights.

Danke,

--
Don, KB7RPU, https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu
There was a young lady named Bright Whose speed was far faster than light;
She set out one day In a relative way And returned on the previous night.