this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
121 points (95.5% liked)
Open Source
31354 readers
324 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd absolutely love putting any of the absolute abhorrent music or art I make under that license if it didn't mean a large corporation could come in and use it for their own financial gain.
Then there's CC BY-NC-SA (non-commercial use only, copyleft)and
Yeah. In my opinion the copyleft aspect is the most important one. It just forces them to share their derivate work under the same license. CC calls that 'SA' (Share-Alike). I'm perfectly okay to gift things to the community if I get the same in return. And I think that's how it's supposed to be. I don't care if somebody else can make a few bucks out out of it, as long as they allow me and everyone else the same thing with their stuff. I'm not really a fan of No-Commercial. I think this is too restrictive. Prohibits good projects just because someone is making some form of profit. And 'commercial' isn't well defined.
Just make it CC BY-SA if that's important to you. Or CC0 if you don't care or love absolute freedom.
Since this is a post about free and open-source music: non-commercial is not open-source.