Return to Answer

##Update: We didn't just cut it from the TOS. Given that the old wording understandably concerned people, we wanted to be crystal clear, so we literally reversed it.

The old phrase:

whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others,

has been changed to:

with the exception of content entirely created by You,

We could have just cut it, but wanted to make it explicitly clear that users can re-post their own content elsewhere as they see fit.

Thanks for bringing this to our intention - the language there wasn't reflective of what we intended. (I'll resist the urge to blame an overly protective lawyer, since I literally don't know who drafted it back then, but it's not a fit for our philosophy, so it's gone.)

This same issue is discussed from a network-wide perspective in this post on Meta.SO.

Update: We didn't just cut it from the TOS. Given that the old wording understandably concerned people, we wanted to be crystal clear, so we literally reversed it.

The old phrase:

whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others,

has been changed to:

with the exception of content entirely created by You,

We could have just cut it, but wanted to make it explicitly clear that users can re-post their own content elsewhere as they see fit.

Thanks for bringing this to our intention - the language there wasn't reflective of what we intended. (I'll resist the urge to blame an overly protective lawyer, since I literally don't know who drafted it back then, but it's not a fit for our philosophy, so it's gone.)

This same issue is discussed from a network-wide perspective in this post on Meta.SO.

##Update: We didn't just cut it from the TOS. Given that the old wording understandably concerned people, we wanted to be crystal clear, so we literally reversed it.

The old phrase:

whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others,

has been changed to:

with the exception of content entirely created by You,

We could have just cut it, but wanted to make it explicitly clear that users can re-post their own content elsewhere as they see fit.

Thanks for bringing this to our intention - the language there wasn't reflective of what we intended. (I'll resist the urge to blame an overly protective lawyer, since I literally don't know who drafted it back then, but it's not a fit for our philosophy, so it's gone.)

This same issue is discussed from a network-wide perspective in this post on Meta.SO.

##Update: We didn't just cut it from the TOS. Given that the old wording understandably concerned people, we wanted to be crystal clear, so we literally reversed it.

The old phrase:

whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others,

has been changed to:

with the exception of content entirely created by You,

We could have just cut it, but wanted to make it explicitly clear that users can re-post their own content elsewhere as they see fit.

Thanks for bringing this to our intention - the language there wasn't reflective of what we intended. (I'll resist the urge to blame an overly protective lawyer, since I literally don't know who drafted it back then, but it's not a fit for our philosophy, so it's gone.)

This same issue is discussed from a network-wide perspective in this post on Meta.SO.

Update: We didn't just cut it from the TOS. Given that the old wording understandably concerned people, we wanted to be crystal clear, so we literally reversed it.

The old phrase:

 

whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others,

has been changed to:

 

with the exception of content entirely created by You,  

We could have just cut it, but wanted to make it explicitly clear that users can re-post their own content elsewhere as they see fit.

Thanks for bringing this to our intention - the language there wasn't reflective of what we intended. (I'll resist the urge to blame an overly protective lawyer, since I literally don't know who drafted it back then, but it's not a fit for our philosophy, so it's gone.)

This same issue is discussed from a network-wide perspective in this post on Meta.SO.

##Update: We didn't just cut it from the TOS. Given that the old wording understandably concerned people, we wanted to be crystal clear, so we literally reversed it.

The old phrase:

 

whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others,

has been changed to:

 

with the exception of content entirely created by You,

We could have just cut it, but wanted to make it explicitly clear that users can re-post their own content elsewhere as they see fit.

Thanks for bringing this to our intention - the language there wasn't reflective of what we intended. (I'll resist the urge to blame an overly protective lawyer, since I literally don't know who drafted it back then, but it's not a fit for our philosophy, so it's gone.)

This same issue is discussed from a network-wide perspective in this post on Meta.SO.