How do we handle stated restrictions around coding challenge sites' legalese?

I see things like the following on a certain coding challenge site:

I also see 63 posts on CR.SE as of the writing of this question.

I'm not a fan of the overreach and attempts to exert otherwise unenforceable restrictions, but I'm no site owner either.

How does CR.SE handle these things? (... because I have a question about a challenge already mentioned in a CR post)

Users ought to be encouraged to summarize the requirements in their own words (optionally adding a link to the source of the challenge).

At present, the Help Centre mentions the use of programming-challenge tag, but gives no further guidance. Although it's clear that many users don't read that page, it would be helpful to be able to add a comment pointing there to advise users, when they've lifted text wholesale from a challenge site.

As an aside, I'm surprised that the authors there think they can restrict disclosure, but perhaps that's a possibility in the legal system they chose? I'm no lawyer, in any country; it just seems weird.

• "I'm surprised that the authors there think they can restrict disclosure" It's a legacy from when people printed books. With websites, it's a completely different world and oddly enough people don't realize their content gets copied the moment you send it to your user. There is literally copying going on all the time. – Mast yesterday

Here's a suggested auto-review comment, for those that would like to help askers avoid getting into this position:

# [Q] Large block-quote
Please summarise the requirements **in your own words** if possible, and keep a link to the original. We don't want to lose your question just because the copyright owner complains that you have infringed their rights.

Edits to improve this wording would be greatly appreciated - I've made it a Community Wiki, and will add the consensus version to Frequently Posted Comments in a week or two.

• Won't requesting to rewrite the requirements carry the risk of resulting in misunderstood requirements and false closures? Even questions looking on-topic while they fail the actual requirement? – Mast yesterday
• @Mast: could be; that's why I recommend adding a link where possible (so reviewers can check - at least if the linked resource is accessible enough, and while it remains available). If you have a better form of words, go ahead and edit! – Toby Speight yesterday
• Better than nothing. I'm not convinced we should even leave such a comment, but if we have to, this one is pretty thorough I guess. – Mast yesterday
• You have a good point. In most cases, challenge-solving code questions don't really add much value - most of them have the same issues to raise again and again - so it wouldn't be a great loss if we have to lose one or two. Maybe not worth commenting on, then. Other opinions welcome - anyone? – Toby Speight yesterday
• The only thing we explicitly require is ownership of the code. I don't recall we ever made a problem of copying problem statements. I know on other SE sites there have been DMCA takedowns (one of the math sites had problem statements to which the author of the statements objected being shared), but on CR, not much. At the end of the day, it's an SE employee problem. Not a community one. – Mast yesterday