4 posts

  • avatar
    37 sounds
    3 posts
    A different licence?

    This might have already been proposed but as I'm not sure and can't find anything, I'll ask anyway.

    The Creative Commons only seems to operate three types of licence these days (the others have been retired).

    I want a different one that sits somewhere between Attribution NC and Attribution.


    I'm more than happy for my sounds to be used as part of a much larger project - say movie foley; but not sold of piecemeal - that's not why I do it.

    The CC Licences don't seem to allow that - it's either give it away for free (in effect) or not.

    Most of the sounds I create for our own project are uploaded to Freesound where appropriate under the CC Attribution terms. Now, this is a tricky one, but it seems to me (as a community film director and sound engineer) that this sort of thing is sorely missing with these rather blunt licences.


  • avatar
    238 sounds
    539 posts

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer smile

    IMHO, you might consider NC as much less of a show stopper than it seems at first.
    If you choose it, you are free to lift it at any time for any particular project; you can reach all individual agreements you want, and lift it just for free because you like that particular project, or for some sort of compensation you and the counterpart will agree upon.

    So what it really does in the end, for those who want to get past it, is force them to contact you first if they want to play fair, and give you legal ground to sue should they violate the clause.

    Of course, I see how a proper intermediate solution like yours would make life simpler, without the need for all those agreements. smile


  • avatar
    2005 sounds
    2167 posts

    I am also not a lawyer... smile

    Freesound has taken the view that simplicity should prevail, and the site (And the contents it shares) should be made as easy to use and understant as possible.
    There are other Creative Commons licenses. Freesound simply chooses to limit the number of licenses under which sounds can be published for simplicity (for both uploaders and users of those sounds). The hope is that the selection of licenses offered will cover the needs of most of the people who consider uploading their sounds here.

    I am not in the site admin team, but I am not aware of any plans to extend the types of licenses currently offered.
    What are the options?
    If there is work that you are happy to share for others to use but not to distribute 'as is', you can try to upload to other sites.
    There are Creative Coomons licenses which allow only for Derivative works to be created. Any material shared under such licenses can be incorporated and modified into other works (i.e., used creatively). But people could not, for example, add those sounds to a sound library on a CD.
    I am not sure if Soundcloud offers CC Derivative type licenses.
    The Internet Archive used to, but not sure if it still does.
    In both of these sites you can create an account and upload your material for free.

    I want to believe.
  • avatar
    1130 sounds
    412 posts

    Attribution 3.0 requires that the license of unchanged sounds needs to be made clear. If somebody was to sell your sounds, they would have to 1. make clear what license/terms the sounds are under and 2. give attribution to you or 1. change the sound and 2. give attribution to you.

    I believe that this attribution requirement breaks any "exploitative", legal re-selling of sounds under Attribution 3.0.

    smidoid wrote:
    The Creative Commons only seems to operate three types of licence these days (the others have been retired).

    There are seven: (6 licenses + cc0).

    smidoid wrote:
    [...] blunt licences.

    What do you mean by blunt?

    Click here to lend your support to: Freesound 2011 donations and make a donation at !
    Donate to
    so it can serve even more and better sounds to you in the future!

    4 posts