If you put this in your software as John Doe committer/employee then your employer is now in violation of the CC license since it is not properly attributed. J

If you put this in your software as John Doe committer/employee then your employer is now in violation of the CC license since it is not properly attributed. Just being in your source code is not enough, especially if you redistribute binaries or other obfuscated manners of packaged code. A lot of shops I have worked for in the past have compiled license attributions for all included works. Imagine if this CC license was excluded! Thus you copy and pasting code from stack overflow in your day to day coding as an employee opens your employer up to liability. This is just like looking at GPLv3 code saying “yep that makes sense” and then copy and pasting that. You are copying the license with the text and tainting your future code base if you do not have the right to alter the existing license. now with that said It’s highly unlikely this would ever be pursued at all or if it is, then swiftly settled out of court. But never underestimate legal trolls with nothing better to do Ps this was in the context of employee/employer for-hire development. If you have the ability to attribute code as required either because this is a personal project or you are founder of said business then please disregard. My example was for jr Suzy F DevMcFace working for BigSoullessEvilCorp(TM)