Version 1.1 of the definition has been released. Please help updating it, contribute translations, and help us with the design of logos and buttons to identify free cultural works and licenses!

Difference between revisions of "Definition/Unstable"

From Definition of Free Cultural Works
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(144 intermediate revisions by 59 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{divbox|blue|Unstable version|This is the openly  
+
{{divbox|blue|Unstable version|This is the openly editable version of the definition. Please try to find a consensus for any significant changes you make on the [[Talk:Definition/Unstable|discussion page]]. If you want to work on a substantially different derivative, you can try [[creating a fork]]. See [[authoring process]] for more information.}}
editable version of the definition. Please try to find a consensus for  
 
any significant changes you make on the  
 
[[Talk:Definition/Unstable|discussion page]]. If you want to work on a  
 
substantially different derivative, you can try [[creating a fork]]. See
 
[[authoring process]] for more information.}}
 
  
----
+
== Preamble ==
This document provides a definition of "Free Cultural Works" [the
 
Definition], which are roughly works or expressions that can be freely
 
studied, applied, copied and modified, by anyone and for any purpose. 
 
The Definition distinguishes between ''free works'' and
 
''[[licenses|free licenses]]'' which can be used to legally protect the
 
status of a free work.  The definition itself is ''not'' a license; it
 
is a tool to determine whether a work or license should be considered
 
"free."  This document also describes restrictions that respect or
 
protect the freedoms of Free Cultural Works.
 
 
 
== Summary ==
 
 
 
'''Free Cultural Works''' are works which anyone can
 
* '''Use'''
 
* '''Study'''
 
* '''Copy'''
 
* '''Change and Improve'''
 
* '''Sell'''
 
 
 
'''Free Culture Licenses''' are legal instruments by which copyright
 
owners grant users these freedoms and make their works into Free
 
Cultural Works.
 
 
 
In addition to the 5 freedoms listed above '''Free Cultural licenses'''
 
may also include certain restrictions. These can include:
 
* '''Attribution''' - acknowledge other authors
 
* '''Share-alike''' or '''Copyleft'''- derived works must be licensed
 
under the same or compatible license as the original
 
* '''Protection of Freedoms''' - the license may require additional
 
permissions or information is distributed with the works (such as source
 
code, design drawings, musical scores, access codes) where these are
 
needed to create new versions of the work.
 
* '''Due Credit''' Give credit where credit is due. If it's not your
 
work do not claim it as yours.
 
  
== Preamble ==
+
Through global communication networks, hundreds of millions of human beings today have the ability to access, modify, author, publish and distribute artistic works, scientific and educational materials, commentary, reports, and documents; in short: anything that can be represented as a sequence of bits. In many cases, however, we find that traditional copyright laws, which provide authors and artists with decades of protection even beyond their death, can impede cultural and scientific progress.
  
Since the earliest humans appeared on planet earth they have drawn,  
+
Works built by communities collaborating as volunteers, art created for the purpose of shared enjoyment, essential learning materials, scientific research funded through taxpayer money, and many other works do not benefit from artificial scarcity. They benefit from being used freely. We therefore believe that these works should be free, and by "freedom" we mean:
painted, sang, carved, weaved, danced, recited, built, studied. These
+
* the freedom to study the work and to apply knowledge acquired from it
cultural works have been passed down from parent to child, from master
+
* the freedom to redistribute copies, in whole or in part, of the information or expression
to apprentice ever since, each taking the works of those that went
+
* the freedom to make improvements or other changes, and to release modified copies
before and passing it on to those who came after; each adding and
 
improving and polishing and translating what they received so that human
 
culture could grow and develop.
 
  
Since Science has been based on an explicit philosophy of sharing
+
These freedoms should be universally available to absolutely anyone, anywhere. To the extent possible, they should not be restricted by the context in which the work is used.
information, with all scientists expected to publish and any scientist
 
free to repeat any experiment, we have seen an unprecedented explosion
 
of scientific knowledge.
 
  
In recent years social and technological advances make it possible for a
+
Any original work of authorship is copyrighted. Under copyright law, authors are considered God-like "creators" and are given legal powers they can use against those who duplicate "their" content in altered or unaltered form. Only very limited freedoms are granted to others unless authors choose to explicitly relinquish some or all of these powers. To do so, authors can explicitly release their work into the public domain (no copyright)<sup>[[#Notes|1]]</sup>, or can choose among a vast array of legal documents known as ''[[w:license|licenses]]'' to grant, retain or qualify their exclusive rights.
growing part of humanity to share cultural works that can be
 
represented in digital form with other people they have never met in
 
person. These works include artworks, scientific and educational
 
materials, software, stories, audio and video recordings.  Many
 
communities have formed to exercise these new possibilities and create a
 
wealth of collectively reusable works. As these collaboratively
 
produced works grow in commercial value there is ever greater pressure
 
to monetise these works, to erect toll gates so that the community who
 
collaborated to create these works can be charged to access them.
 
  
At different time over the years Copyright and Patent legislation has
+
Not all licenses grant the freedoms enumerated above. For example, some popular licenses forbid the creation of derivative works, or the commercial use of a work. Some licenses are even more specific. They limit usage of the work to particular regions of the world, or to relative quantities of information.
been introduced as a way of restricting and taxing that free flow of  
 
information - as a way of rewarding particularly innovative new
 
contributions or favoured supporters of the government of the time.
 
These laws have been used to create the tollgates mentioned above.
 
  
'''Free Culture licenses''' have been created to provide a legal
+
However, no work can be truly called "free" unless it can be freely shared, freely modified, freely aggregated, freely combined, and freely provided through any channel. Works under licenses that prohibit these essential freedoms stand seperate from the body of works that is not impeded by these restrictions. They are philosophically and legally incompatible with the licensing options used by the growing movement that refers to its works as "free content" or "free expression."
framework which reflects these collaborative working practices,
 
providing a simple way for people to share with others the rights needed
 
for such collaborations to happen, so that users can collaborate and
 
work together  to create and improve '''Free Culture Works''' and ensure
 
that these works stay free.
 
  
==Free Cultural Works==
+
Any license which requires the term "free" to be significantly qualified ("it is free, but you cannot ..") can only mean "free" in the sense of "gratis, without cost". It can never mean that every essential freedom is present. It is the goal of this definition to precisely define the essential freedoms, and to provide guidelines by which existing licenses can be certified as meeting this definition.
Free Cultural Works are works where
 
* '''anyone''', i.e. rich or poor, socialist or fascist, man, woman or
 
corporation;
 
* '''anywhere''', i.e. worldwide;
 
* '''anytime''', i.e. unlimited and irrevocable and forever.
 
has each of the following freedoms
 
====The freedom to use and perform the work====
 
to make any use, private or public, of the work. For kinds of works
 
where it is relevant, this freedom should include all derived uses
 
("related rights") such as performing or interpreting the work. There
 
must be no exception regarding, for example, political or religious or
 
commercial considerations.
 
  
====The freedom to study the work and apply the information====
+
== Naming and versioning ==
to examine the work and to use the knowledge gained from the work in any
 
way. The license may not, for example, restrict "reverse engineering".
 
  
====The freedom to redistribute copies====
+
You may refer to this definition as the "Free Content and Expression Definition" (its full name), the "Free Content Definition", or the "Free Expression Definition". Consequently, you may call a work covered by this definition "free content" or (a) "free expression" (the terms may or may not be capitalized). [[Which name should you use?]] summarizes some arguments for and against the two names and possible alternatives.
whether they are sold, swapped or given away for free, as part of a
 
larger work, a collection, or independently. There must be no limit on
 
the amount of information that can be copied. Neither may there be a  
 
limit on who can copy the information or on where the information can be
 
copied. The license may not, for example, forbid "Commercial'
 
exploitation of the work.
 
  
====The freedom to distribute derivative works====
+
New versions of this definition shall be released as soon as a consensus (achieved directly or through a vote, as per the [[authoring process]]) has developed around suggested changes. Numbering shall be 0.x for initial draft releases, 1.x, 2.x .. for major releases, x.1, x.2 .. for minor releases. A minor release is made when the text is modified in ways which do not have an impact on the scope of existing or hypothetical licenses covered by this definition.
including modified versions (or, for physical works, a work somehow
 
derived from the original), regardless of the intent and purpose of such
 
modifications.
 
  
== Permissible restrictions==
+
== Recommended and required criteria ==
There are certain requirements and restrictions on the use or
 
interchange of works that we feel do not impede the essential freedom in
 
our definition. These restrictions can therefore be included in Free
 
Culture licenses. They are described below.
 
  
=== Attribution of authors ===
+
This definition uses the terms ''may'', ''may not'' and ''must not'' in obvious ways to distinguish required and optional criteria for covered licenses. Importantly, it uses the term ''should'' where we recommend that licenses which do not meet the stated criteria should be amended. Later versions of this definition may make some of these criteria mandatory.
  
Attribution protects the integrity of an original work, and provides
+
== Essential freedoms ==
credit and recognition for authors. A license may therefore require
 
attribution of the author or authors, provided such attribution does not
 
impede normal use of the work. For example, it would not be acceptable
 
for the license to require a significantly more cumbersome method of
 
attribution when a modified version of the licensed text is distributed.
 
  
In addition to the requirement for attribution the license may include
+
In order to be recognized as "free" under this definition, a license must grant the following freedoms without limitation:
restrictions to ensure the original author is not seen to be responsible
 
for changes to the work made by others. This may include restrictions
 
on the use of trademarks.
 
  
=== Transmission of freedoms ===
+
* '''The freedom to study and apply the information:''' The licensee must not be restricted by clauses which limit their right to examine, alter or apply the information. The license may not, for example, restrict "reverse engineering", and it may not limit the application of knowledge gained from the work in any way.
 +
* '''The freedom to redistribute copies:''' Copies may be sold, swapped or given away for free, as part of a larger work, a collection, or independently. There must be no limit on the amount of information that can be copied. There must also not be any limit on who can copy the information or on where the information can be copied.
 +
* '''The freedom to distribute modified versions:''' In order to give everyone the ability to improve upon a work, the license must not limit the freedom to distribute a modified version, as above, regardless of the intent and purpose of such modifications. However, some restrictions may be applied to protect these essential freedoms, as well as the requirement of attribution (see below).
  
 +
== Allowed requirements and restrictions ==
  
The license may include a clause, often called ''copyleft'' or  
+
There are certain restrictions on the use or interchange of works that we do not feel impede on the essential freedoms enumerated above. These are described below.
''share-alike'', which ensures that derivative works themselves remain
 
free works. To this effect, it can for example require that derivative
 
works are made available under the same free license as the original.
 
  
The license may restrict the redistribution of the work as part of a
+
=== Attribution ===
compilation with other works unless the other other works are under the
 
same license or are under another free license.
 
  
The license may require that where the work is used to provide a service
+
Attribution protects the integrity of an original work, and provides credit and recognition for authors. A license may therefore require attribution of the author or authors, provided such attribution does not impede normal use of the work. For example, it would not be acceptable for the license to require a significantly more cumbersome method of attribution when a modified version of the licensed text is distributed.
over the internet then users of the service will have rights under the  
 
license, such as the right to access, copy, amend and redistribute the  
 
source code for software.
 
  
 
=== Protection of freedoms ===
 
=== Protection of freedoms ===
  
The license may include clauses that strive to further ensure that the  
+
The license ''may'' include clauses that strive to protect the [[#Essential freedoms|essential freedoms]] of the work, such as:
ability to exercise the freedoms listed above is not restricted by
+
* '''transparent copies:''' a clause requiring all copies of the work to be in a transparent file format (documented and not encumbered by patents) which allows the work to be freely used in perpetuity
technical or other means. These can include:
+
* '''copyleft or "share-alike":''' a clause requiring that derivative works are entirely made available under a license which meets this definition
* '''Availability of source data:''' Where a final work has been
+
* '''free from technical restrictions:''' a clause prohibiting the use of technical measures designed to prevent individuals to whom the work is distributed from exercising any of the freedoms described above
obtained through the compilation or processing of design information or a
 
source file or multiple source files, the license may require that
 
underlying source data should be available alongside the work itself
 
under the same conditions. This can be the score of a musical
 
composition, the models used in a 3D scene, the data of a scientific
 
publication, the drawings and parts list of a machine, or any other such
 
information.
 
* '''Use of a free format:''' For digital files, the license may require
 
that the format in which the work is made available should not be one
 
that can only be read using a particular manufacturers program. Formats
 
should be documented and should not be restricted by patents, unless
 
these patents are licensed for use in free works. While non-free formats
 
may sometimes be used for practical reasons, a free format copy means
 
that the information will be accessible to everyone, for ever.
 
* '''No technical restrictions:''' The license may require that the work
 
must be available in a form where no technical measures are used to
 
limit the freedoms enumerated above.
 
* '''No other restrictions or limitations:''' The license may specify
 
that it may not be used to distribute works which are covered by legal
 
restrictions (patents, contracts, etc.) or limitations (such as privacy
 
rights or being for non-commercial use only) which would impede the
 
freedoms enumerated above. This can mean that if you agree to pay a  
 
patent holder for the right to use a program then you can lose the right
 
to distribute that program (since you have acknowledged that you think
 
the patent applies to the programme). This is sometimes known as a
 
'''Liberty or Death''' clause and makes it more dificult for owners of  
 
weak patents to divide the users by offering deals to some users under
 
the threat of a costly lawsuit.
 
  
===No other restrictions ===
+
The license ''may not'' include clauses that strive to limit the [[#Essential freedoms|essential freedoms]] of the work, such as:
 +
* '''usage restrictions''': the license must not limit the licensee's actions beyond those which may have a plausible and direct impact on the essential freedoms of the work or its derivatives. Explicitly, it ''must not'' limit commercial use of the work.
  
Apart from these allowed restrictions, the license ''must not'' include
+
== Recommendations ==
clauses that limit essential freedoms. See [[Permissible restrictions]]
 
  
== Free Culture Licenses ==
+
Authors of licenses ''should'' make an effort to gradually make licenses which share the same philosophical roots and legal principles compatible with each other to ensure that works under these licenses can be combined and aggregated freely. This may be accomplished by altering the terms of the license (e.g. by removing a restriction which the other license does not have), or by adding migration clauses which allow the use of the licensed work under the now compatible license.
It is important that any work that claims to be free provides,
 
practically and without any risk, the aforementioned freedoms.
 
  
All new works are automatically covered by existing copyright laws which
+
When making copies of a work, the licensee ''should'' be allowed to refer to a resource pointer instead of being required to distribute the license text itself with each copy of the work. Similarly, the license ''should'' allow the author or authors to specify a resource pointer for the attribution of multiple authors of a work. This is to ensure that the attribution requirement for complex collaborative works does not become an impediment.
default to All Rights Reserved. All Rights Reserved considerably limit
 
what others can and cannot do with the work. Authors can make their
 
works free by choosing among a number of legal documents known as
 
licenses which grant users the 4 freedoms listed above. 
 
 
 
Licenses are legal instruments through which the owner of certain legal
 
rights may transfer these rights to third parties.  Free Culture
 
Licenses do not take rights away — they specify freedoms that are not
 
included in a default copyright license such as All Rights Reserved.
 
When accepted, they never limit or reduce existing user rights and
 
exemptions under copyright law. Because the grant  rights which are
 
additional to the rights users have under copyright therefore users  are
 
not required to accept the license unless they want to exercise those
 
additional rights.
 
 
 
== Identifying Free Cultural Works ==
 
This is the ''Definition of Free Cultural Works'', and when describing
 
your work, we encourage you to make reference to this definition, as in,
 
"This is a freely licensed work, as explained in the
 
''[http://freedomdefined.org Definition of Free Cultural Works]''."  If
 
you do not like the term "Free Cultural Work," you can use the generic
 
term "Free Content," or refer instead to one of the [[Existing
 
Movements|existing movements]] that express similar freedoms in more
 
specific contexts. We also encourage you to use the [[logos and
 
buttons|Free Cultural Works logos and buttons]], which are in the public
 
domain.
 
 
Please be advised that such identification does ''not'' actually confer
 
the rights described in this definition; for your work to be actually
 
free, it must use one of the Free Culture [[Licenses]] or be in the  
 
public domain, or equivalent of.
 
Please don't use other terms to identify Cultural Works; terms which do
 
not convey a clear definition of freedom; terms such as "Open Content"
 
and "Open Access." These terms are often used to refer to content which
 
is available under "less restrictive" terms than All Rights Reserved, or
 
for works that are just "available on the Web", but they don't
 
necessarily carry with them the freedoms referred to in this document.
 
 
 
== Availability of legal instruments ==
 
''Can'' in ''anyone can use, study, copy, change and improve''
 
([[Definition/Unstable#Summary|summary]]) means anyone can realistically
 
make his case in court that such freedom was granted. It implies that
 
where a work is made free by way of a free cultural license, the legal
 
instrument, by which the copyright or other right owner grants the
 
license, must also be available to anyone in the legal form that is
 
legally binding in the relevant legal context. The legal instrument
 
should not be jealously and secretly kept by the first licensee.
 
  
 
== Further reading ==
 
== Further reading ==
  
* See [[Licenses]] for discussion of individual licenses, and whether  
+
* See [[Licenses]] for discussion of individual licenses, and whether they meet this definition or not.
they meet this definition or not.
 
 
* See [[History]] for acknowledgments and background on this definition.
 
* See [[History]] for acknowledgments and background on this definition.
 
* See the [[FAQ]] for some questions and answers.
 
* See the [[FAQ]] for some questions and answers.
* See [[Portal:Index]] for topic-specific pages about free cultural
+
* See [[Portal:Index]] for topic-specific pages about free content and free expressions.
works.
+
 
* See [http://communities.libre.org/ Libre Communities] and  
+
== Notes ==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_knowledge Wikipedia on Free/Libre
 
Knowledge]
 
* See [http://ictlogy.net/?p=12#fourkinds The Four Kinds of Freedom of
 
Free Knowledge]
 
  
== Versioning ==
+
# Under some jurisdictions, notably some European countries, authors have inalienable [[w:moral rights|moral rights]] and cannot completely release their works into the [[w:public domain|public domain]]. If you believe that you have a right to put your own works in the public domain, regardless of what the law says, you can make a declaration of public domain status which contains a safeguard clause, such as: "I, the author of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide. In case this is not legally possible: I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law."
  
New versions of this definition shall be released as soon as a consensus
 
(achieved directly or through a vote, as per the [[authoring process]])
 
has developed around suggested changes. Numbering shall be 0.x for
 
initial draft releases, 1.x, 2.x .. for major releases, x.1, x.2 .. for
 
minor releases. A minor release is made when the text is modified in
 
ways which do not have an impact on the scope of existing or
 
hypothetical licenses covered by this definition.
 
  
 
__NOTOC__
 
__NOTOC__

Latest revision as of 13:23, 18 August 2019

Unstable version
This is the openly editable version of the definition. Please try to find a consensus for any significant changes you make on the discussion page. If you want to work on a substantially different derivative, you can try creating a fork. See authoring process for more information.

Preamble[edit]

Through global communication networks, hundreds of millions of human beings today have the ability to access, modify, author, publish and distribute artistic works, scientific and educational materials, commentary, reports, and documents; in short: anything that can be represented as a sequence of bits. In many cases, however, we find that traditional copyright laws, which provide authors and artists with decades of protection even beyond their death, can impede cultural and scientific progress.

Works built by communities collaborating as volunteers, art created for the purpose of shared enjoyment, essential learning materials, scientific research funded through taxpayer money, and many other works do not benefit from artificial scarcity. They benefit from being used freely. We therefore believe that these works should be free, and by "freedom" we mean:

  • the freedom to study the work and to apply knowledge acquired from it
  • the freedom to redistribute copies, in whole or in part, of the information or expression
  • the freedom to make improvements or other changes, and to release modified copies

These freedoms should be universally available to absolutely anyone, anywhere. To the extent possible, they should not be restricted by the context in which the work is used.

Any original work of authorship is copyrighted. Under copyright law, authors are considered God-like "creators" and are given legal powers they can use against those who duplicate "their" content in altered or unaltered form. Only very limited freedoms are granted to others unless authors choose to explicitly relinquish some or all of these powers. To do so, authors can explicitly release their work into the public domain (no copyright)1, or can choose among a vast array of legal documents known as licenses to grant, retain or qualify their exclusive rights.

Not all licenses grant the freedoms enumerated above. For example, some popular licenses forbid the creation of derivative works, or the commercial use of a work. Some licenses are even more specific. They limit usage of the work to particular regions of the world, or to relative quantities of information.

However, no work can be truly called "free" unless it can be freely shared, freely modified, freely aggregated, freely combined, and freely provided through any channel. Works under licenses that prohibit these essential freedoms stand seperate from the body of works that is not impeded by these restrictions. They are philosophically and legally incompatible with the licensing options used by the growing movement that refers to its works as "free content" or "free expression."

Any license which requires the term "free" to be significantly qualified ("it is free, but you cannot ..") can only mean "free" in the sense of "gratis, without cost". It can never mean that every essential freedom is present. It is the goal of this definition to precisely define the essential freedoms, and to provide guidelines by which existing licenses can be certified as meeting this definition.

Naming and versioning[edit]

You may refer to this definition as the "Free Content and Expression Definition" (its full name), the "Free Content Definition", or the "Free Expression Definition". Consequently, you may call a work covered by this definition "free content" or (a) "free expression" (the terms may or may not be capitalized). Which name should you use? summarizes some arguments for and against the two names and possible alternatives.

New versions of this definition shall be released as soon as a consensus (achieved directly or through a vote, as per the authoring process) has developed around suggested changes. Numbering shall be 0.x for initial draft releases, 1.x, 2.x .. for major releases, x.1, x.2 .. for minor releases. A minor release is made when the text is modified in ways which do not have an impact on the scope of existing or hypothetical licenses covered by this definition.

Recommended and required criteria[edit]

This definition uses the terms may, may not and must not in obvious ways to distinguish required and optional criteria for covered licenses. Importantly, it uses the term should where we recommend that licenses which do not meet the stated criteria should be amended. Later versions of this definition may make some of these criteria mandatory.

Essential freedoms[edit]

In order to be recognized as "free" under this definition, a license must grant the following freedoms without limitation:

  • The freedom to study and apply the information: The licensee must not be restricted by clauses which limit their right to examine, alter or apply the information. The license may not, for example, restrict "reverse engineering", and it may not limit the application of knowledge gained from the work in any way.
  • The freedom to redistribute copies: Copies may be sold, swapped or given away for free, as part of a larger work, a collection, or independently. There must be no limit on the amount of information that can be copied. There must also not be any limit on who can copy the information or on where the information can be copied.
  • The freedom to distribute modified versions: In order to give everyone the ability to improve upon a work, the license must not limit the freedom to distribute a modified version, as above, regardless of the intent and purpose of such modifications. However, some restrictions may be applied to protect these essential freedoms, as well as the requirement of attribution (see below).

Allowed requirements and restrictions[edit]

There are certain restrictions on the use or interchange of works that we do not feel impede on the essential freedoms enumerated above. These are described below.

Attribution[edit]

Attribution protects the integrity of an original work, and provides credit and recognition for authors. A license may therefore require attribution of the author or authors, provided such attribution does not impede normal use of the work. For example, it would not be acceptable for the license to require a significantly more cumbersome method of attribution when a modified version of the licensed text is distributed.

Protection of freedoms[edit]

The license may include clauses that strive to protect the essential freedoms of the work, such as:

  • transparent copies: a clause requiring all copies of the work to be in a transparent file format (documented and not encumbered by patents) which allows the work to be freely used in perpetuity
  • copyleft or "share-alike": a clause requiring that derivative works are entirely made available under a license which meets this definition
  • free from technical restrictions: a clause prohibiting the use of technical measures designed to prevent individuals to whom the work is distributed from exercising any of the freedoms described above

The license may not include clauses that strive to limit the essential freedoms of the work, such as:

  • usage restrictions: the license must not limit the licensee's actions beyond those which may have a plausible and direct impact on the essential freedoms of the work or its derivatives. Explicitly, it must not limit commercial use of the work.

Recommendations[edit]

Authors of licenses should make an effort to gradually make licenses which share the same philosophical roots and legal principles compatible with each other to ensure that works under these licenses can be combined and aggregated freely. This may be accomplished by altering the terms of the license (e.g. by removing a restriction which the other license does not have), or by adding migration clauses which allow the use of the licensed work under the now compatible license.

When making copies of a work, the licensee should be allowed to refer to a resource pointer instead of being required to distribute the license text itself with each copy of the work. Similarly, the license should allow the author or authors to specify a resource pointer for the attribution of multiple authors of a work. This is to ensure that the attribution requirement for complex collaborative works does not become an impediment.

Further reading[edit]

  • See Licenses for discussion of individual licenses, and whether they meet this definition or not.
  • See History for acknowledgments and background on this definition.
  • See the FAQ for some questions and answers.
  • See Portal:Index for topic-specific pages about free content and free expressions.

Notes[edit]

  1. Under some jurisdictions, notably some European countries, authors have inalienable moral rights and cannot completely release their works into the public domain. If you believe that you have a right to put your own works in the public domain, regardless of what the law says, you can make a declaration of public domain status which contains a safeguard clause, such as: "I, the author of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide. In case this is not legally possible: I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law."