Creative Commons: what am I not thinking about that I maybe should be?
July 23, 2024 10:54 AM Subscribe
I'm thinking seriously about releasing a feature length animated movie with a Creative Commons License, specifically one that allows for reuse (in whole or part) for commercial ends, though I would have to be credited (attributed), and any reuse would need to be shared under the same terms (see link below). I'm comfortable with the decision. I haven't taken it lightly. But is there something I'm not considering that I should be? Is there some Creative Commons (Copyleft) horror story that you're aware of? Maybe it happened to you, maybe someone you know.
To be clear, I realize this won't be helping me much financially. But I've seen many a low budget, high workload independent release try and fail to even begin to reach an audience, let alone make any worthwhile cash. So I'm making the call that my main concern is just getting the work out there. Whatever it takes to find people. Why not let random strangers do some of this work for me? Why do anything to mitigate such (beyond reserving credit/attribution and ensuring the same terms apply to any reuse)?
The license in question is CC BY-SA *
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-SA includes the following elements:
BY: credit must be given to the creator.
SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms.
* link is to a more thorough description of the license than seen here, the actual Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Deed
To be clear, I realize this won't be helping me much financially. But I've seen many a low budget, high workload independent release try and fail to even begin to reach an audience, let alone make any worthwhile cash. So I'm making the call that my main concern is just getting the work out there. Whatever it takes to find people. Why not let random strangers do some of this work for me? Why do anything to mitigate such (beyond reserving credit/attribution and ensuring the same terms apply to any reuse)?
The license in question is CC BY-SA *
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-SA includes the following elements:
BY: credit must be given to the creator.
SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms.
* link is to a more thorough description of the license than seen here, the actual Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Deed
Also:
a feature length animated movie
that's seriously impressive. I'm impressed.
posted by trig at 12:52 PM on July 23 [1 favorite]
a feature length animated movie
that's seriously impressive. I'm impressed.
posted by trig at 12:52 PM on July 23 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: it's overall mature in terms of its tone etc but there's little if anything in it that would get it rated R or even PG-13 (ie: nudity, violence, foul language, whatever else we're worried about these days).
posted by philip-random at 2:16 PM on July 23
posted by philip-random at 2:16 PM on July 23
The NC clause is absolutely required. Otherwise, people will take your own work and sell it online next to your own listing. There are people/groups that absolutely "repost" CC works online. They may even file copyright takedowns against your own work.
You can always grant individuals the right to use your work in commercial contexts, but by default you want the NC clause. I can't stress this enough. The NC clause helps remove the profit incentive for the worst content farmers.
posted by AlSweigart at 2:46 PM on July 23 [3 favorites]
You can always grant individuals the right to use your work in commercial contexts, but by default you want the NC clause. I can't stress this enough. The NC clause helps remove the profit incentive for the worst content farmers.
posted by AlSweigart at 2:46 PM on July 23 [3 favorites]
(This is from my own experience with my written books released under a CC license.)
posted by AlSweigart at 2:47 PM on July 23 [1 favorite]
posted by AlSweigart at 2:47 PM on July 23 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: thanks, AlSweigart. The problem I'm facing is that I want this video posted to Youtube but the only Creative Commons license Youtube currently allows is BY-SA. Which someone had mentioned to me in the past, but I finally went and looked into it myself.
Which got me to this:
Why I’m Giving up on Creative Commons on YouTube
So at the moment, consider me undecided. One aspect of just going with Youtube that does intrigue me is the pure curiosity of seeing what happens if I just let this thing go off into the wild. I've already decided I'm not in this for the money. So the question becomes -- what am I in it for?
posted by philip-random at 10:58 AM on July 24
Which got me to this:
Why I’m Giving up on Creative Commons on YouTube
So at the moment, consider me undecided. One aspect of just going with Youtube that does intrigue me is the pure curiosity of seeing what happens if I just let this thing go off into the wild. I've already decided I'm not in this for the money. So the question becomes -- what am I in it for?
posted by philip-random at 10:58 AM on July 24
Not being in it for money is different than helping your enemies. Which you kind of have to be ok with if you do CC by SA.
I've only released stuff under CC with NC because even though I want it to be available and re-used, I don't want to enable bad actors seeking profit off my labor. This was code for scientific research, not artistic endeavor, so re-use is a little different.
I did have to find alternate hosting solutions due to my choice of license. Might you find hosting that supports NC license on Vimeo or some other platform?
posted by SaltySalticid at 2:02 PM on July 24
I've only released stuff under CC with NC because even though I want it to be available and re-used, I don't want to enable bad actors seeking profit off my labor. This was code for scientific research, not artistic endeavor, so re-use is a little different.
I did have to find alternate hosting solutions due to my choice of license. Might you find hosting that supports NC license on Vimeo or some other platform?
posted by SaltySalticid at 2:02 PM on July 24
There is a lot I don't know about copyright, which the following will probably make obvious. But: might it be possible to release two versions? One, the one that would go on YouTube et al, would not be CC. It would be regular old "all rights are mine". But the other, which you'd distribute from your website or some other place and to which maybe the YouTube version would link, would be CC BY-NC, or a license even more specific about what you do and don't permit.
The idea would be a little like how some software is provided under one set of terms for one set of users (e.g. individual users or small companies making less than $X) and another set of terms for other users (e.g. large corporations).
So the question becomes -- what am I in it for?
Yeah, that really is the question. If you just want as many people to see it as possible, regardless of whether they think it was made by someone else and regardless of whether they think they have to pay someone else to watch or use it, then maybe go for BY-SA. If your goal is to have it spread as much as possible but remain, as much as possible, associated with you, then maybe start by ensuring you have a web presence that can build at least an initial audience for this, such that there's a core of people online who know that it's yours, who link to your site or accounts when they mention it, who maybe give it some coverage, and so on.
It does seem like you could always start with a more restrictive license and open things up if you find you want to.
(I should say I do really appreciate your impulse to go CC. I have benefited so much over the years from less-restricted content. And AlSweigart, your books have been on my list of things I really hope to get to because they look awesome, and the fact that they're CC is awesome. And people doing things for reasons beyond maximizing profits is a balm in this world.)
posted by trig at 3:32 PM on July 24 [1 favorite]
The idea would be a little like how some software is provided under one set of terms for one set of users (e.g. individual users or small companies making less than $X) and another set of terms for other users (e.g. large corporations).
So the question becomes -- what am I in it for?
Yeah, that really is the question. If you just want as many people to see it as possible, regardless of whether they think it was made by someone else and regardless of whether they think they have to pay someone else to watch or use it, then maybe go for BY-SA. If your goal is to have it spread as much as possible but remain, as much as possible, associated with you, then maybe start by ensuring you have a web presence that can build at least an initial audience for this, such that there's a core of people online who know that it's yours, who link to your site or accounts when they mention it, who maybe give it some coverage, and so on.
It does seem like you could always start with a more restrictive license and open things up if you find you want to.
(I should say I do really appreciate your impulse to go CC. I have benefited so much over the years from less-restricted content. And AlSweigart, your books have been on my list of things I really hope to get to because they look awesome, and the fact that they're CC is awesome. And people doing things for reasons beyond maximizing profits is a balm in this world.)
posted by trig at 3:32 PM on July 24 [1 favorite]
« Older Where to buy a bottle of wine in Berkeley? | Places to buy jigsaw puzzles NOT designed by AI? Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by trig at 12:50 PM on July 23 [1 favorite]