Can I use Creative Commons now and still sell my photos later?
Asked 9/11/2010
3 views
2 answers
0
I’m a beginner photographer and currently share my images online under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license because I like letting people use them non-commercially with credit. At the same time, I may want to license or sell some of my photos later, possibly through stock sites, and I’m worried about making choices now that could limit me in the future.
What’s the difference between copyright and licensing in this situation? If I post images under a Creative Commons license, can I still offer separate commercial licenses later? Should I avoid sharing full-resolution files if I might want to sell them?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
11
You seem to be mixing up two different concepts, copyright and licensing.
As a photographer, you own the copyright for images you create (unless you have other contracts which override this, such as a work for hire agreement). The only other action to take regarding your copyright is optionally registering as such (which is usually optional).
Your main question here is regarding the licensing of your work. It is possible to offer multiple licenses for a single work (a non-exclusive license). This is the default, so you are able to offer a creative commons license for non-commercial use, then also offer a separate license that allows commercial use. In this way, you can make a profit on commercial use without charging someone for personal use.
Some stock sites will require an exclusive license, meaning that you are agreeing to only provide a single license of your work. If you were to take this route, you would not be able to also provide a creative commons licensed version.
Also, it is important to keep in mind that the licenses you provide are by default a permanent agreement, meaning that you can not simply change the licenses you have provided in the past. This means that any images that you have previously released under a creative commons license are no longer eligible for exclusive licensing, but you would be able to offer a non-exclusive license.
Originally by user67. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user67
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Copyright and licensing are different. As the photographer, you generally own the copyright to images you create unless a contract says otherwise. A Creative Commons license does not give up your copyright; it’s just one way of letting others use the image under certain terms.
In most cases, you can do both: publish an image with a non-commercial Creative Commons license and also offer separate commercial licenses later, because non-exclusive licensing is the default. The main caution is that some stock agencies may require exclusivity, so check their terms before uploading.
A practical approach is to share only lower-resolution versions online and keep the high-resolution files or RAWs private for potential licensing or sales. That lets people enjoy and share your work while preserving most commercial value.
Also keep in mind that giving images away for free may attract people who expect free use, so think carefully about which images you want to donate to the public and which you want to keep for paid licensing.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Can I credit a Creative Commons image album once instead of attributing each photo individually?
How should I attribute a modified Creative Commons photo in a personal print or photo book?
How do I license my photos under Creative Commons for a competition?
How should Creative Commons photo attribution be handled in a printed book?
Where can I find Creative Commons 360° panorama photos for a project?