Forums

    7 posts

  • avatar
    1921 sounds
    1755 posts
    Which Wikipedia licence is compatible with Freesound licence


    Say I wish to put a sound sample on Wikipedia (Wikimedia.org) which includes Freesound samples.

    Which, if any, of the licenses acceptable by Wikimedia.org are compatible with current Freesound.org licence ?, (they are listed here) … http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Creative_Commons_copyright_tags

    None seem to offer the "attribution" and “no advertising” conditions of the Freesound licence …

    http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/

  • avatar
    18 sounds
    456 posts


    They don't allow cc-by-nc, which is closest to "no advertising"; just deny all commercial use. So you wouldn't be able to upload the sound on Wikimedia Commons. But you could of course contact the sound creators whose samples you've used and ask for permission to upload your sound under cc-by-sa license.

  • avatar
    1921 sounds
    1755 posts


    Thanks NemoDaedalus,

    Yes I looked like that to me too.

    Freesound2 is billed as offering more licensing options, two of which seem compatible with Wikipedia …

    Freesound2 will have 3 licenses:

    - cc-zero (a public-domain-like license). One-liner: you can do whatever you want, no need for credits
    - attribution. one-liner: you can do whatever you want, but you need to credit me.
    - attribution-non-commercial. one-liner: you can't make money with whatever you make from this sample, and you need to credit me.

    In the search the license will be selectable + in the atrtibution form it should be easier...

    - Bram

    http://www.freesound.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=22126#22126

    I wonder which of these three categories will the existing samples will be put into by default when the second coming (Freesound2) happens ?
    “attribution-non-commercial” seems the only one which doesn’t conflict with the the current Freesound licence, but is more restrictive than the current Freesound licence.

  • avatar
    18 sounds
    456 posts


    Yeah, I think so. And uploaders can then choose a less restrictive license if they want.

  • avatar
    35 sounds
    6 posts


    When Freesound2 will be available?
    I'd suggest to add CC-BY-SA as a license, anyway.

  • avatar
    35 sounds
    6 posts


    Also, when new licenses will be available, there should be a way for users to update all their uploads to one of such licenses.

  • avatar
    1921 sounds
    1755 posts


    geodylabs
    Also, when new licenses will be available, there should be a way for users to update all their uploads to one of such licenses.

    The new FS2 licence options are visible if you upload something (disposable*) on the Beta version of FS2 ... http://tabasco.upf.edu/home/upload/

    7 posts