Contrat Type / Modèle / LICENCE CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 - licence Creative Commons (CC)
- COMMENT VENDRE L’USAGE COMMERCIAL ?
Que signifie « CC BY-NC-ND » ? Une licence Creative Commons est une autorisation donnée à l’avance. Avec le CC BY-NC-ND, vous dites :
"Tout le monde peut partager ma musique, du moment que c’est pour du non-commercial, qu’on me crédite, et qu’on ne la modifie pas."
C’est une permission générale, pas une restriction.
Objectif :
Vous voulez que les particuliers puissent télécharger et écouter gratuitement.
Vous voulez interdire l’usage commercial sans paiement.
La licence CC BY-NC-ND fait EXACTEMENT cela :
✅ NC (NonCommercial) : Un usage commercial (pub, film, entreprise) est interdit sans votre autorisation. Cela vous permet de facturer.
✅ ND (No Derivatives) : Personne ne peut modifier votre morceau.
✅ BY (Attribution) : Votre nom doit être cité.
✅ Le partage est autorisé : Les fans peuvent télécharger et partager.
C’est la licence la plus protectrice de Creative Commons . Elle correspond parfaitement à un souhait de gratuité pour les particuliers et de paiement pour les pros.
La bonne formule, si vous devez écrire un texte, est uniquement :
"Ce morceau est sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Pour tout usage commercial, me contacter."
Toutes les sources spécialisées s’accordent sur un point : les licences Creative Commons sont des ensembles prédéfinis et indivisibles. Vous ne pouvez pas piocher des éléments ailleurs ou les cumuler avec un copyright classique.
| Source | Information clé |
|---|---|
| UCL | Le CC BY-NC-ND est la licence CC la plus restrictive. Elle interdit l'usage commercial et les modifications. |
| Creative Commons | Les licences sont des combinaisons exclusives de BY, NC, ND, SA. CC BY-NC-ND est un pack complet et indivisible. |
| Guides universitaires | Il existe 6 licences CC. Le ND et le SA ne peuvent pas être combinés, mais le BY-NC-ND est une combinaison officielle. |
En résumé : Copyright = Je ferme. CC = J’ouvre avec conditions. Vous voulez ouvrir avec conditions. Choisissez CC BY-NC-ND.
| Élément | Détail |
|---|---|
| Titre de l’œuvre | [Nom de votre morceau] |
| Auteur·rice | [Votre nom ou pseudo] |
| Année | [Année de publication] |
| Licence | Creative Commons Attribution – Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale – Pas de Modification 4.0 International |
| URL de la licence | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.fr |
Ce que vous pouvez faire sans me demander la permission, à condition de me créditer clairement (mon nom, le titre, un lien) :
| Action | Exemples concrets |
|---|---|
| Écouter | Streaming personnel, playlists privées |
| Télécharger & Partager | YouTube, SoundCloud, blogs, réseaux sociaux personnels |
| Utiliser en fond sonore | Vidéo personnelle, podcast amateur, projet scolaire, fête de village, mariage |
⚠️ Conditions : Pas de modification du morceau. Pas d'utilisation commerciale.
Tout usage commercial est strictement interdit sans licence payante signée avec moi.
| Domaine | Exemples d'usages interdits |
|---|---|
| Marketing & Publicité | Spot TV/radio, campagne Instagram/TikTok, vidéo corporate |
| Création de contenu pro | YouTubeurs, podcasteurs, streamers monétisés |
| Audiovisuel | Films, séries, documentaires (même festivals) |
| Numérique | Jeux vidéo, applications, logiciels vendus ou financés |
| Lieux publics / pros | Commerces, hôtels, restaurants (musique d'ambiance) |
👉 Si vous gagnez de l'argent grâce à ma musique, vous devez me payer.
Tarifs indicatifs basés sur les barèmes SACEM, bibliothèques musicales (Audiojungle, PremiumBeat, Artlist, Epidemic Sound) et agrégateurs (DistroKid, CD Baby, TuneCore).
| Type d'utilisation | Tarif France (HT) | Tarif International (USD) |
|---|---|---|
| Réseaux sociaux (YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, Twitch) – non exclusif, 1 an, monde | 150 € – 450 € | $150 – $500 |
| Podcast professionnel (monétisé, marque, entreprise) | 200 € – 600 € | $200 – $700 |
| Vidéo d'entreprise / corporate | 300 € – 800 € | $300 – $900 |
| Publicité en ligne (campagne display, pré-roll, réseaux sociaux) | 500 € – 1 500 € | $600 – $2 000 |
| Spot TV / Radio – diffusion nationale (1 an, France) | 1 500 € – 5 000 € | $2 000 – $6 000 |
| Spot TV / Radio – diffusion internationale | 3 000 € – 10 000 € | $4 000 – $12 000 |
| Film / Court-métrage (festival, hors exploitation commerciale) | 300 € – 800 € | $300 – $900 |
| Film / Long-métrage (exploitation en salles) | 2 000 € – 8 000 € | $2 500 – $10 000 |
| Série TV / Plateforme SVOD (Netflix, Amazon, Disney+, Canal+) | 3 000 € – 15 000 € | $4 000 – $20 000 |
| Jeu vidéo (indépendant) | 400 € – 1 200 € | $500 – $1 500 |
| Jeu vidéo (majeur / éditeur) | 2 000 € – 8 000 € | $2 500 – $10 000 |
| Type d'utilisation | Tarif France (HT) | Tarif International (USD) |
|---|---|---|
| Musique d'ambiance (commerce, hôtel, salon, restaurant) – par an | 200 € – 500 € | $250 – $600 |
| Événement public / festival (diffusion sonore) | 150 € – 400 € | $150 – $500 |
| Échantillonnage / Remix commercial (autorisation écrite obligatoire) | 500 € – 2 000 € | $600 – $2 500 |
| Cession exclusive (vous êtes le seul utilisateur) | x3 à x5 le tarif standard | x3 à x5 le tarif standard |
-
Envoyez-moi un message à [votre email] avec :
- Le nom du morceau souhaité.
- La description précise du projet (support, durée, territoire, durée d'utilisation).
- Votre budget (si vous en avez un).
-
Je vous réponds sous 48h avec :
- Un devis personnalisé.
- Un contrat de synchronisation simple et clair.
- Le fichier audio en haute qualité (WAV 48kHz 24bit).
-
Vous payez → vous utilisez légalement.
💡 Paiement accepté : virement, PayPal, Stripe.
Cette œuvre est protégée par le droit d'auteur.
La licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 est irrévocable pour les usages non commerciaux.
| Situation | Conséquence |
|---|---|
| ✅ Usage personnel ou amateur | Gratuit à vie, sans demande d'autorisation |
| ✅ Partage entre amis | Toujours autorisé |
| ❌ Usage commercial sans paiement | Interdit, même dans 20 ans |
| ❌ Infraction constatée | Dommages-intérêts + rattrapage de licence exigibles |
| Plateforme / Action | Consigne |
|---|---|
| SoundCloud | Choisissez CC BY-NC-ND dans le menu. Supprimez toute mention "Tous droits réservés". |
| YouTube | Passez par un agrégateur (DistroKid, CD Baby) pour activer Content ID. |
| Votre site / bio | Copiez-collez ce texte (ou une version simplifiée) avec vos tarifs et votre email. |
| Pour les pros | Utilisez les tarifs 2026 ci-dessus. Négociable, mais pas en dessous de 50 € pour un usage commercial. |
- Licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (texte officiel) : https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.fr
- Tarifs SACEM synchronisation 2026 : https://sacem.fr
- Baromètre des bibliothèques musicales 2026 : https://musiclibraryreport.com
- CD Baby – Guide des licences synchronisation : https://cdbaby.com/sync-licensing
- DistroKid – Spotify & YouTube Content ID : https://distrokid.com
- Creative Commons – FAQ juridique : https://creativecommons.org/faq
Le "4.0" n'est pas un détail technique, c'est un bouclier juridique essentiel. Voici pourquoi, de manière simple et concrète.
| Version | Année | Statut |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 2002 | ❌ Obsolète |
| 2.0 | 2004 | ❌ Obsolète |
| 2.5 | 2005 | ❌ Obsolète |
| 3.0 | 2007 | |
| 4.0 | 2013 | ✅ Recommandée |
💡 Le 4.0 est la version la plus récente (toujours valide en 2026) et la plus aboutie.
| Version 3.0 | Version 4.0 |
|---|---|
| "CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 France" | "CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International" |
| Valable surtout en France | ✅ Valable dans tous les pays |
| Complexité juridique à l'étranger | ✅ Application universelle |
Votre musique sur YouTube et SoundCloud est écoutée mondialement → la 4.0 vous protège partout.
La version 4.0 a été spécifiquement améliorée pour les musiciens :
- ✅ Couverture explicite des droits voisins (artistes-interprètes et producteurs)
- ✅ Protection claire de vos fichiers MP3/WAV
- ✅ Encadrement précis de la synchronisation (musique + image)
📖 Extrait important de la section 1a :
"For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image."
👉 Traduction concrète : Si quelqu'un met votre musique sur une vidéo YouTube (même amateur), c'est techniquement une "adaptation" interdite par le ND (No Derivatives). Vous gardez le contrôle total.
Si votre musique est utilisée dans :
- Une application mobile
- Un jeu vidéo
- Un échantillonneur
La 4.0 protège aussi les droits sui generis sur les bases de données (section 4 du texte).
| Scénario | Validité |
|---|---|
| Licence 4.0 utilisée aujourd'hui → version 5.0 sort demain | ✅ Toujours valide |
| Licence 3.0 utilisée aujourd'hui | ❌ Considérée comme "obsolète" par les professionnels |
| Problème | Conséquence |
|---|---|
| Ambiguïté juridique | Les tribunaux internationaux connaissent mal la 3.0 |
| Protection incomplète | La 3.0 ne couvre pas clairement les enregistrements sonores |
| Manque de crédibilité | Les professionnels (producteurs, avocats) attendent la 4.0 |
| ✅ Avantages de la 4.0 |
|---|
| Version la plus récente (2013, toujours valide) |
| Mieux adaptée aux musiciens (synchronisation, droits voisins) |
| Plus reconnue internationalement |
| Meilleure protection pour vendre des licences commerciales |
⚠️ Ne mettez pas juste "CC BY-NC-ND" sans le 4.0. Cela laisse planer un doute : version 1.0 ? 2.0 ? 3.0 ? Les professionnels préfèrent la certitude.
"Version 4.0 of the CC licenses are the most up-to-date licenses, and are recommended for all new works. They are internationally valid, and protect the rights of creators in the digital environment."
🔗 https://creativecommons.org/version4/
🎯 En conclusion : le "4.0" est votre meilleur allié juridique. Ne vous en privez pas !
This work is based on and inspired by this source : https://github.com/Gibberspaces3/GitHub-Templates/blob/master/License-Templates/CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0/LICENSE-CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0.md
Question: On SoundCloud, if I share a DJ's music publicly, am I allowed to? Or music from any artist in general?
Answer:
The short answer is no — you almost never have the right to share a DJ's or an artist's music on SoundCloud without explicit permission, even if you purchased it or if the use is non-commercial.
Here is a detailed explanation to help you understand why and what the exceptions are.
Why you generally cannot share this music
Sharing someone else's music, whether an original track or a full DJ set, is considered use of a work protected by copyright. To do so legally, you must obtain permission.
Key points to remember:
Buying a track does not give you the right to publish it: purchasing a title on a platform or downloading it does not grant you the rights to share it on SoundCloud, whether in full or in part.
DJ sets are covered: the rule applies to any content created by someone else, including DJ sets, remixes, and mashups.
Setting a track to private is not enough: even if you upload a protected track as a private download on your profile, this is not permitted because it is still possible to share that private link with other listeners.
Crediting the artist is not enough: giving credit to the original artist or mentioning that the use is non-profit is not a legal protection and does not authorise you to share their work.
If you do not comply with these rules, your content can be removed and your account can be permanently closed if reported.
Are there exceptions or alternatives?
Yes, there are a few specific cases where you can share this type of content within the rules.
| Case | Conditions | Explanation / Example |
|---|---|---|
| You obtain explicit permission | You must have written, documented permission from the rights holder. | The permission must often come from the label that holds the rights to the recording, not just from the artist themselves. Keep this proof in case of a dispute. |
| The work is in the public domain | The musical composition must no longer be protected by copyright. | This applies to very old classical music (e.g. Beethoven). Note: your own personal recording of such a work is permitted, but not a recording by a modern orchestra, which remains protected. |
| Use of samples or free beats | This is a very risky area. | It is often difficult to verify whether the person who uploaded a "free" beat had the right to do so and to grant you that right. SoundCloud recommends contacting the original creator for clear authorisation. |
| An alternative platform: Mixcloud | If you are a DJ and want to share your mixes, this platform is specifically designed for that purpose. | Mixcloud operates under a different type of licence that allows mix sharing, unlike SoundCloud which is historically more suited to original content creators. |
In short, to legally share a DJ's or an artist's music on SoundCloud, the only reliable solution is to obtain clear, documented authorisation from the rights holder. For DJs who want to share their mixes, turning to platforms like Mixcloud is a much safer and more sustainable alternative.
Question: Ok, and what if this music is already online and publicly available on the internet, there is no information about the licence, and I downloaded it to my PC?
Answer:
This new information unfortunately does not change the answer: you still do not have the right to share this music on SoundCloud.
The fact that a track is freely and publicly accessible on the internet, and that you downloaded it to your computer, gives you no right to republish it elsewhere. This is a common misconception, but the rule is very strict.
Here is why your situation remains problematic and what you risk.
1. Downloading transfers no rights
This is the fundamental principle to remember: downloading a file or buying a track does not give you the right to publish it.
Listening vs. publishing: music available for public streaming is made available for private listening. The artist or label has not authorised its reproduction on other channels.
The absence of information is a warning sign: you say there is no information about the licence. In the absence of an explicit licence (such as a Creative Commons licence that would authorise reuse), copyright applies by default in its most restrictive form. This means that any reuse is prohibited.
2. Your download does not go unnoticed
Even if the music is already online, SoundCloud does not treat your download as a harmless new copy. The platform uses automatic content recognition systems (often called Content ID or audio fingerprinting systems).
Automatic detection: as soon as you upload the track, SoundCloud's system will analyse the file and compare it against a vast database of protected works.
Immediate blocking: if the system recognises the track (which is very likely), your upload will be automatically blocked, made unplayable, or removed, whether your upload is public or private.
3. What you risk in practice
The consequences are the same as in the general case explained above:
Your track will be removed. In the event of repeat infringements or multiple violations, your SoundCloud account can be permanently closed.
The only exception that might apply
For you to be within your rights, the music you downloaded would need to be placed under a specific licence that authorises reuse, such as Creative Commons licences. These licences are usually clearly indicated on the track's page (in the description or metadata). The absence of any information means there is no such licence.
In short: the public accessibility of a work and its download onto your hard drive do not create a right of use. Under the law and for SoundCloud, you do not own this file and have no right to distribute it. Your upload risks being automatically detected and blocked.
Question: Where and how can I verify the licence of a music track online?
Answer:
To verify the licence of a music track on the web, you must first understand a fundamental principle: in the absence of a clearly stated specific licence, the track is automatically under "All rights reserved". You therefore cannot reuse it.
However, if an artist has chosen to share their work under a Creative Commons (CC) licence, the information is generally visible. Here is how to find it and interpret it.
Where and how to check a track's licence
Here is a practical guide to locating licence information, whether on SoundCloud or on other platforms.
1. On SoundCloud
This is one of the simplest platforms for this kind of search, as it integrates filters and clearly displays licences.
Method 1 — use the dedicated search filter: perform a normal search with keywords (for example, "ambient music"). Click on the "Tracks" tab to see the results. Use the available search filters. You should find an option to filter results and display only sounds available under a Creative Commons licence. This is the most effective way to find content you can legally use.
Method 2 — check on a track's page: if you have found a specific track, look carefully at its page. Licence information is generally found below the audio player, in the metadata section or in the track description. If the artist has applied a Creative Commons licence, it will be clearly indicated with the CC logo and the licence type (for example, CC BY-NC-ND).
2. On other platforms and search engines
The principle is the same: look for filters and information on the content's page.
| Platform / Tool | How to check / Filter licences |
|---|---|
| YouTube | Perform a search. Click on "Filters". Under "Features", select "Creative Commons". The licence is also indicated in the video description by clicking "More". |
| Google Images | Perform an image search. Click on "Tools". In the "Usage rights" dropdown, select an option such as "Creative Commons". Note: this method is more suited to images than to music. |
| Specialised platforms | Sites such as Jamendo, the Free Music Archive, ccMixter, or Dogmazic are specifically designed to host music under Creative Commons licences. The licence is displayed next to each track. |
How to interpret Creative Commons licences
Once you have found a licence, it is crucial to understand what it authorises you to do. Creative Commons licences are built as a combination of four main conditions.
| Condition | Meaning |
|---|---|
| BY (Attribution) | Mandatory in all licences. You must credit the original author. |
| NC (NonCommercial) | Commercial use of the work is prohibited. |
| ND (NoDerivatives) | You may not modify, remix, or adapt the work. |
| SA (ShareAlike) | If you modify the work, you must share it under the same licence. |
| Licence | Use | Modification (Remix) | Commercial use | Main obligation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CC BY | Yes | Yes | Yes | Credit the author |
| CC BY-SA | Yes | Yes | Yes | Credit the author + share under identical licence |
| CC BY-ND | Yes | No | Yes | Credit the author |
| CC BY-NC | Yes | Yes | No | Credit the author |
| CC BY-NC-SA | Yes | Yes | No | Credit the author + share under identical licence |
| CC BY-NC-ND | Yes | No | No | Credit the author |
Important reminder: the absence of any licence mention means the work is under the default copyright regime, i.e. "All rights reserved". In that case, you cannot use it without explicit authorisation from the rights holder.
In short, your search for usable music should focus on tracks that clearly display a Creative Commons licence. If the information is not visible, assume you do not have the right to use it.
The answer is yes, broadly speaking. Copyright is a legal framework that applies regardless of the platform. It is not SoundCloud's invention: the rules stem from international conventions (notably the Berne Convention) and national legislation. Each platform then translates them into its own terms of service and technical tools.
YouTube
YouTube has the most developed detection system, known as Content ID. This system scans every uploaded video and compares it against a database provided by rights holders (labels, publishers, distributors). If a match is found, the rights holder can choose between three options: block the video, monetise it in their place, or simply collect viewing statistics. Sharing an artist's music without authorisation is therefore subject to the same restrictions as on SoundCloud, with detection that is often even faster and more systematic.
YouTube also offers a Creative Commons search filter that works in the same way as on SoundCloud.
Instagram and TikTok
Both platforms have licence agreements negotiated directly with major labels and some independent distributors. This means you can use certain tracks in your videos within the framework defined by these agreements, but these agreements have geographic limits and specific conditions. A track available as background music on TikTok in one country may be blocked in another. Outside the catalogue covered by these agreements, the same general rules apply: you cannot use a track without authorisation.
Twitch
Twitch has seen large waves of VOD (replay) removals due to protected music played during streams. The platform uses a detection system on recorded videos, even though live streams are sometimes less immediately affected. The rules are the same, but enforcement differs depending on whether the content is live or stored as a replay.
Mixcloud
Mixcloud is a notable exception. The platform has negotiated collective licences with rights management organisations (such as SACEM in France, or PRS in the UK). These licences allow DJs to share their mixes without needing individual authorisation for each track. This is why Mixcloud is the recommended platform for sharing DJ mixes. In return, Mixcloud pays royalties to rights holders from the platform's revenue.
What changes from one platform to another
The legal foundation does not change, but the following elements vary:
| Aspect | What varies by platform |
|---|---|
| Detection tool | Each platform has its own system (Content ID on YouTube, proprietary systems elsewhere). Detection efficiency and speed differ. |
| Pre-existing licence agreements | Some platforms (TikTok, Instagram, Mixcloud) have negotiated collective licences that cover part of the music catalogue. |
| Consequences for infringement | Content removal, audio muting, geographic blocking, redirected monetisation, or account suspension depending on the platform. |
| Legally available catalogue | The catalogue covered by collective licences varies greatly from one platform to another and from one country to another. |
The baseline rule remains the same everywhere: if you have no written proof of authorisation, or if the track is not explicitly under a Creative Commons or equivalent licence, sharing another artist's music puts your content at risk of removal and your account at risk of sanctions.
The rules discussed above for music are not specific to that domain. Copyright applies to any work that results from a creative act, provided it carries a minimum of originality. The platform where it is published, the format it takes, or the tool used to produce it has no bearing on that protection. What matters is the act of creation itself.
Below is an overview of the main categories concerned, what protection covers, and the specific points worth knowing for each.
A photograph is protected as soon as it is taken, with no registration required. This applies to professional studio work, editorial images, street photography, and also to personal photos shared on social media. The moment a photographer presses the shutter, the resulting image is their property.
Using a photo found on Google Images, a news website, or any public page without authorisation is an infringement, regardless of whether you credit the photographer. The same applies to screenshots of photos. Cropping or applying a filter to an image does not make it a new original work and does not cancel the original copyright.
Stock photo platforms such as Getty Images, Shutterstock, or Adobe Stock operate on licence systems. Purchasing a licence grants a defined right of use — it does not transfer ownership. The permitted uses (editorial only, commercial, print runs, number of users) are specified in each licence agreement.
Free alternatives exist through platforms like Unsplash, Pexels, or Pixabay, where photographers voluntarily release their work under permissive licences. Even then, the terms vary and should be read carefully before use.
Hand-drawn illustrations, digital drawings, character design, concept art, and any similar work are protected under the same framework as photography. The medium — pencil, ink, tablet, or software — changes nothing about the protection that applies.
Fan art occupies a legally ambiguous position. Drawing a character from an existing franchise is, strictly speaking, the reproduction of a protected work (the character design belongs to its creator or their rights holder). Whether this is tolerated depends entirely on the policy of the rights holder. Tolerance is common in practice, but it is not a legal right.
Generating an image using AI tools based on an existing artist's style raises ongoing legal debates that courts in several countries are currently handling. The legal landscape on this specific point is unsettled at the time of writing.
Traditional paintings, watercolours, and other physical artworks are protected just like digital works. A photograph of a painting you did not create is not yours to use, even if the photograph itself is yours. The image of the artwork inherits the copyright of the artwork.
There is an important distinction : paintings and artworks old enough to be in the public domain (generally when the artist has been dead for 70 years or more, depending on the country) can be reproduced freely. However, the photograph of such a painting may or may not be protected depending on jurisdiction. In many European countries, a faithful photographic reproduction of a public domain painting carries no new copyright. In other jurisdictions, it may. This remains an area where local law matters.
Logos, posters, typographic compositions, packaging design, infographics, and editorial layouts are all protected works. A designer who creates a logo owns the copyright to it unless they have explicitly transferred those rights in a contract — which is standard practice in client work but must be clearly stated.
Using someone else's logo or design work without permission, even for non-commercial purposes, is an infringement. This includes modifying the design slightly and presenting it as your own.
Design assets such as icon sets, UI kits, or template files distributed on platforms like Freepik, Creative Market, or Dribbble come with their own licences. Free downloads frequently restrict commercial use. Paid downloads extend those rights within defined limits. Reading the licence before use is necessary.
A font file is a piece of software and is therefore protected under software copyright. The visual design of the letterforms may additionally be protected in some jurisdictions. Using a font requires a valid licence that covers the intended use — desktop use, web embedding via CSS, application embedding, and broadcast use are typically sold as separate licences.
Purchasing a font for personal desktop use does not automatically permit web embedding. Distributing a font file to a client or a colleague without checking the licence terms is a common infringement.
Free fonts available on Google Fonts or Font Squirrel are released under open licences (often SIL Open Font Licence) that generally permit broad use including commercial projects, but the licence file should always be verified.
A website's visual design — its layout, colour scheme, spacing decisions, custom illustrations, and overall composition — is a creative work protected by copyright. Copying the design of an existing website, even if you rewrite the underlying code, constitutes infringement of the designer's work.
UI component libraries and design systems released publicly (such as Material Design or Carbon) come with specific licences that define what can be reused, modified, and in what context. Open source does not mean public domain and does not mean unrestricted commercial use in all cases.
Screenshots of interfaces taken from other products should not be used in your own work without permission, particularly in commercial contexts.
Code is treated as a literary work under copyright law. A function, a class, a library, or a full application written by someone else is their protected work from the moment it is written.
Open source software does not mean free of conditions. Each open source licence imposes requirements :
| Licence type | Key conditions |
|---|---|
| MIT | Attribution required. Very permissive otherwise, including commercial use. |
| Apache 2.0 | Attribution required. Patent rights included. Commercial use permitted. |
| GPL (v2 and v3) | Any derivative work must be released under the same licence (copyleft). Commercial use permitted under that condition. |
| LGPL | Similar to GPL but allows linking from proprietary software without triggering copyleft. |
| AGPL | GPL terms extended to software used over a network (SaaS). Strong copyleft. |
| Creative Commons (for code) | Technically usable but not recommended for software by the CC organisation itself. |
| Proprietary | No reuse, modification, or redistribution without explicit permission. |
Copying code from Stack Overflow, GitHub repositories, or tutorials without checking the applicable licence is a common mistake. Stack Overflow content is licensed under Creative Commons with attribution, which has implications for commercial projects. GitHub repositories with no licence file are not in the public domain — the absence of a licence means all rights are reserved by default.
A video — whether a short clip, a documentary, a YouTube video, or a feature film — is protected. This includes the visual content, the dialogue, the soundtrack, and the editing choices as a whole.
Using clips from films, series, or YouTube videos without authorisation in your own productions is an infringement, even for short extracts. YouTube's Content ID system handles detection automatically, as described in the previous section.
The concept of fair use (in the United States) or fair dealing (in the UK and Commonwealth countries) allows limited use of copyrighted material for purposes such as commentary, criticism, parody, or education — but these are legal defences, not automatic rights, and their applicability depends on specific circumstances assessed case by case.
Architectural works — buildings, structures, and the drawings and plans that define them — are protected. However, most jurisdictions include a freedom of panorama exception that allows photographs of buildings visible from public spaces to be taken and published without authorisation. The scope of this exception varies significantly by country, including within the European Union.
A video game is a composite work. It contains source code, visual assets, audio, narrative content, and user interface design, each of which carries its own copyright. Streaming or recording gameplay raises specific questions that each platform handles differently through direct agreements with publishers. Screenshots and clips used for review or commentary may fall under fair use or fair dealing depending on jurisdiction.
Game assets — sprites, sound effects, 3D models — distributed under open licences on platforms like itch.io or OpenGameArt carry their own terms that must be read before use.
A 3D model is a protected work. Models downloaded from platforms like TurboSquid, Sketchfab, or CGTrader are governed by licences that define allowed uses (personal, commercial, editorial, resale). Models marked as free often restrict commercial use. Models integrated into a published product (a game, an app, a printed item) must be covered by a commercial licence.
| Category | Protected from | Common exception or open alternative |
|---|---|---|
| Photography | The moment the shutter is pressed | Unsplash, Pexels, Pixabay (check terms) |
| Illustration and drawing | The moment the work is created | OpenClipart, public domain archives |
| Painting and fine art | The moment the work is created | Works by artists dead 70+ years (public domain, jurisdiction-dependent) |
| Graphic design | The moment the work is created | Freepik free tier (with attribution, non-commercial) |
| Typefaces and fonts | The font file as software | Google Fonts (SIL OFL), Font Squirrel |
| Web and UI design | The moment the design is created | Open design systems with stated licences |
| Source code | The moment the code is written | MIT, Apache, GPL and other open source licences |
| Video and film | The moment of recording or editing | Creative Commons video on Vimeo or YouTube |
| Architecture | The drawings and the building | Freedom of panorama (scope varies by country) |
| Video games | All components individually | Open game assets on OpenGameArt, itch.io |
| 3D models | The moment the model is created | Free tiers on Sketchfab, TurboSquid (check terms) |
The common thread across all these categories is the same as for music : in the absence of a clearly stated licence that permits reuse, the work is protected and you need authorisation to use it. The platform where you found it, the ease with which it was accessible, and the fact that it was publicly visible change nothing about that legal reality.
༄☕︎︎︎ stripe.com
. Thank you for your support