Creative Commons Licensing
Discussions focus on recommending Creative Commons licenses such as CC0, CC-BY-SA, and others for releasing works into the public domain or allowing open reuse, often comparing them to software licenses like MIT or GPL and addressing their legal implications.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Creative Commons works that way. So its possible.
Please license them as CC SA or similar.
Why not use a CC0 license which is essentially the same?
Check out the CC0 license and its justifications:https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc... https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Don't CC-NC licenses count?
Cool! I'd suggest you slap a CC-BY, CC-BY-SA or CC-BY-NC-SA license on it if you have a second; doesn't take long and lets everyone know your preferences.
I believe CC-BY[0] covers this. Worth noting that CC is more of a generalist license than software, though, so you may not have as fine-grained control as with BSD/GPL/MIT etc. [0] https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
I'd suggest using the following Creative Commons license:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Looks like it's released under an MIT license?(Also as I understand it, it can be hard or impossible to contribute works to the public domain before automatic copyright terms expire in some countries, and that is the justification for CC0.)
Seems quite clear that the author would encourage that and be glad of it. There's a CC0 license at the bottom.