12

Does using a library already constitute a derivative work, meaning I would not be allowed to do that? Merely using an unmodified library would generally not be considered creating a derivative work but the devils is in the details! For instance, calling a GPL-licensed library may subject the caller to the GPL copyleft. Now the CC-BY-NC-ND is a rare, ...


5

The author has chosen to distribute some portion of someone else's GPL-licensed work as part of a larger work. The author has also chosen to distribute some of their own work under CC BY-NC-ND. As you might expect, this causes a GPL violation, since the author is violating the GPL by offering a derivative of the GPL code under the GPL-incompatible CC BY-NC-...


5

I want to publish my re-written code with new features on GitHub with MIT license. Can I do it or will I encounter problems? No, you can not publish your rewritten and extended code, because the CC BY-NC-ND license under which you received the original code does not give you permission to publish your changed code. For reasons only known to the author of ...


5

It would seem so. Many software licenses (and all open/free licenses) grant the right to redistribute and change at minimum, so picking one of those doesn't suit. CC licenses aren't made for software, and this is actually an asset to you for this. CC BY-NC-ND is non-free, non-open, and grants almost no rights at all. You're allowed to use the work as ...


4

A commercial use is one primarily intended for commercial advantage or monetary compensation. (Source: Creative commons) So if you only have the adverts for financing the page it's ok, but when you are making money out of it it's not ok.   I really don't want to attribute any link on that page that has the logo That isn't possible. But you could ...


4

The best solution is not to stray into open source/free software at all. CC-BY-NC-ND is already non-free and non-open, but you can go much further. You can publish your source all rights reserved. The act of publishing it grants an implicit license that people may read it. Projects that are NC, ND or all rights reserved are not open source projects though,...


3

This is not legal advice. You shouldn't be trusting legal interpretations from an unqualified, Canadian secondary school student. I advise you to seek professional advice from a qualified person. The question you've asked here, is whether programmatically looping a song results in a derivative. The question at stake is a general one: when does manipulating ...


3

A definite "maybe". Before the explanation, a disclaimer: I am not an attorney. Here's the pro-violation argument: you have no right to access those photos at all except under the license. Therefore any use you make of them has to comply with the terms of the license. Certainly if there are structures and portions of images which end up in the GAN image, ...


3

Ask the project's author to correct the license. From your description, he seems to be violating the GPL. However, that doesn't give you the right to use the project's code. Violating the GPL doesn't void the CC-BY-NC-ND license.


2

That is a tricky question and the answer depends whether you ship it as one entity or as two (and whether that can be done sensibly). Generally any CC-NC license is incompatible with any GPL license: The latter allows commercial usage. However, if your artwork is distributed as a separate package, and your code can live without the artwork, it's fine. But ...


2

The CC-BY-NC-ND license allows you to Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format That means, you can surely add it to your repository as long as the license stays intact. That means that your repository cannot be a pure open source repository anymore. Please make sure you associate the right parts of it with the right licenses. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible