Standard license vs source code

Please login to write an answer
divVerent
14. January 2021
Hi,

I'd like to use music from this site in a game I am creating. The game itself will likely be distributed under the Apache 2.0 license as an open source project, with a specific source directory for third party content.

Distribution will look as follows:

a) on github.com source repository, the project will contain files such as:

third_party/filmmusic.io/assets/music/title.ogg (transcoded from your files, potentially slightly edited with a crossfade to a position near the start to allow infinite looping)
third_party/filmmusic.io/assets/music/title.music (configuration file with loop start/end points)
third_party/filmmusic.io/LICENSE (first all copyright notices verbatim as provided upon download, also referencing the filename title.ogg, then a copy of your standard license, but in form of a text file)
third_party/filmmusic.io/assets/credits/filmmusic.io.txt (just the copyright notices, potentially reformatted with line breaks or spacing changes to appear in in-game credits)

b) In binaries of the game, the music will be integrated into the game executable file. It takes some hackery to get the files out (basically looking for something in the executable that looks like a zip file header and cutting the file off from there), but if one does, one will see files as follows:

music/title.ogg
music/title.music
filmmusic.io.LICENSE (still referencing clearly that the license applies to music/title.ogg)
credits/filmmusic.io.txt

However your license says:

> You are not allowed to sell or redistribute unaltered copies of the music [...] You can’t re-distribute the music as a musical item, as stock, in a tool or template, or with source files. You can’t do this with music either on its own or bundled with other items (such as an audio compilation), and even if you modify the music. You can’t re-distribute the music as-is or with superficial modifications. [...]

Does that mean I can't redistribute the mp3/ogg files of your music on Github or as part of the game, as long as it's "easy to extract"? Do I need to take any measures to make extraction "harder"? If so, what do you suggest?

Related question: if people post footage of my game on YouTube, I assume they still need to fulfill your license as long as my game plays the music. To mitigate, I guess I will provide an option to turn off the music in the game, but otherwise any suggestion on how I can make this requirement really clear to video uploaders/streamers?
saschaende
STAFF
14. January 2021
Not allowed.
saschaende
STAFF
14. January 2021
Also with the extended license this is not allowed!

You have to search for another platform or make a direct deal with an artist.
divVerent
14. January 2021
That is interesting, as the CC-BY license many of the tracks have been previously published with as written absolutely allows such usage - but I of course can respect this.

Just out of curiosity, which is the part that isn't allowed?

- Including in the source directory on Github?
- Including in a game executable binary in a way people "who want to" can extract?
- Both?
saschaende
STAFF
14. January 2021
All is not allowed.

Also with CC Music not allowed.
The game itself will likely be distributed under the Apache 2.0 license as an open source project
You have to use the same license if you use cc license!
So generally not allowed. Also NOT with CC music.

Before you are asking, why:
Most important aspect is, that the Apache license grants a patent and the cc by (and the Filmmusic licenses) does not grant patents.

You will never be allowed to change the license of things you use.

By choosing Apache 2.0 license you can not add music or elements with another license and publish them as Apache 2.0.
Unbelievable that you really want to do this!
You also can not use cc music and publish it with a public domain project.

The artists have rights, so respect this! And you should really read up on the topic of "compatible licenses". You can't just mix everything together and publish it under a new license. That's not possible and as a developer you should really know that.

Thank you!
divVerent
14. January 2021
> The game itself will likely be distributed under the Apache 2.0 license as an open source project

Yes, but packages under Apache 2.0 license may contain parts under other licenses. The Apache 2.0 license is not like the GPL in that it must cover the entire package once it covers anything.

> You have to use the same license if you use cc license!

This is true for CC-BY-SA but not for CC-BY. CC-BY can be packaged as part of a combined work with other-licensed things.

> Before you are asking, why:
> Most important aspect is, that the Apache license grants a patent and the cc by (and the Filmmusic licenses) does not grant patents.

This is true, but easily resolved by making clear which parts of the game are under which license.

> You will never be allowed to change the license of things you use.

Of course not.

> By choosing Apache 2.0 license you can not add music or elements with another license and publish them as Apache 2.0.
> Unbelievable that you really want to do this!
> You also can not use cc music and publish it with a public domain project.
>
> The artists have rights, so respect this!

Of course - no matter whether my intepretation is right or wrong here, I do respect your right to not have this done and am therefore no longer considering the Apache 2.0 license. That's why I asked.

> And you should really read up on the topic of "compatible licenses". You can't just mix everything together and publish it under a new license. That's not possible and as a developer you should really know that.

I can mix Apache 2.0 with GPL v3, and release the whole under GPL v3.

Anyway, forget Apache 2.0 because regarding the rather specific patent language you do have a point: would I be allowed to include your music - at least the one that has previously been released under CC-BY terms - if I were to release my game under GPL v3? www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ccby explicitly lists CC-BY as a compatible license. Creative Commons too lists GPL v3 as a compatible license even for CC-BY-SA 4.0: creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses

Next, what if I released my entire game under CC-BY, even though that's discouraged by organizations like the FSF?
saschaende
STAFF
14. January 2021
If you release it under CC BY you can only use music that was released with CC BY.
On Filmmusic many tracks had CC BY SA before - or other PREMIUM licenses.

If you want to use CC BY, be careful - and only use music you downloaded in the past!

For all downloads from now on the Filmmusic license is valid.

divVerent
14. January 2021
Good, thank you!
saschaende
STAFF
14. January 2021
But the whole thing is not very easy. Here is some more information regarding CC and software:
creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/

The main problem will occur when people stream the game and play the music and do not make the appropriate copyright notices.

I know what I am talking about.

That's why we prohibit it in our new licenses - not to annoy people, but because experience shows that licenses are almost always violated .....

So I strongly recommend hiring a musician for a computer game or working with one.
saschaende
STAFF
14. January 2021
No one will show the credits of the game in their video and make the appropriately prescribed copyright notices.
This kind of use does not contribute to the motivation to continue producing free music.
After all, you can already see that artists are releasing more and more music under the PREMIUM license - so it's no longer free at all. This is a consequence of rules not being followed by users.

Think about it.

Payment methods