Can I choose different licences for different parts of a work?
Yes. You can choose different Creative Commons licenses for different parts of a single work. The most common mistake is to apply one license to an entire file or page when the copyright holder controls distinct components that need separate treatment. A music video is a typical case: the song, the footage, the cover art and a third-party sample may each need its own license. The same rule applies to a research paper with a separately licensed dataset, a website with a blog post and a theme, or a video game with code, art and music. As long as you hold or control the copyright in each part and you mark each part clearly so a downstream user knows which license applies to which component, the answer is yes.
The Exact License Condition You Must Meet
Version 4.0 of the Creative Commons licenses does not prevent you from licensing parts of a work separately. The legal code operates on what it calls the 'Licensed Material,' defined as the digital literary or artistic work you identify in the license notice. Identify the whole video as CC BY 4.0, and that is what the public receives permission to use. Identify only the audio track as CC BY 4.0 and mark the video layer as All Rights Reserved, and you have created two scopes of permission. The official license terms require that the notice makes the scope unambiguous. A vague notice that says .licensed under CC BY 4.0. without specifying what it covers forces a user to guess and creates avoidable legal risk.
Write the scope into the notice. 'Background music by Jane Doe, CC BY 4.0' is clear. 'Image of mountain from example.org, dedicated to the public domain via CC0' is clear. 'This entire article is CC BY 4.0 except the photo gallery, which is All Rights Reserved' is clear. The decisive exception is material you do not own: you cannot license a third party's component at all, regardless of which license you pick for your own parts. If you include a photograph that a friend took and you do not have written permission to relicense it, your only honest option is to mark it as used with permission or to remove it.
How to Mark Exceptions, Third-Party Material and Components Clearly
Three Marking Patterns That Work
Marking is the single step that prevents downstream confusion and legal friction. A user who finds a CC-licensed video and later discovers the soundtrack is not covered has no way to know unless you stated it. The Creative Commons recommended practices for attribution and the official license chooser both emphasise that the notice must identify the work, the creator, the exact license and version, and the source. When you have multiple scopes, add a scope field.
- Inline per component: In a blog post, place the license notice after each separate piece. 'Chart data: CC0. Map image: CC BY 4.0. Written analysis: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.' The user sees the granularity immediately.
- Table or list in a credits section: For a video or audio work, put a credits block in the description or end credits that lists each component, its creator, its source URL and its license. This is the safest method when pieces change over time or when a single frame contains multiple rights holders.
- Container-level notice with exceptions: 'This project is CC BY-SA 4.0 except where noted. The logo in the top-left corner is a registered trademark and is not licensed.' This works for a collection where most parts share one license.
Handling Third-Party Material
Third-party material requires special handling. If you use a clip from a stock site under a CC license, retain the exact notice the creator supplied. If you use a clip under fair use or with separate permission, say so explicitly: 'Opening title sequence used under license from rights holder. Not covered by the CC license on the rest of the video.' A user who ignores that notice and treats the title sequence as CC-licensed has no defence if challenged.
| Factor | What It Means | Who It Affects |
|---|---|---|
| Reach | A part licensed under a restrictive license (ND, NC) is less reusable than one under BY. A video with a BY music track and NC narration means the whole work cannot be used commercially unless the user gets separate permission for the narration. The restrictive part limits the reach of the whole. | Downstream reusers who want to share or adapt the work |
| Compatibility | Two parts with different SA licenses may not be compatible when combined into an adaptation. A BY-SA 4.0 code library cannot be combined with a BY-NC-SA 4.0 dataset if the result is shared as an adaptation, because Creative Commons lists no compatibility between those two SA conditions. The official compatibility chart controls; do not assume compatibility where it is not listed. | Users who want to remix or build on multiple parts |
| Reversibility | Once you release a part under a CC license, you cannot withdraw that license from people who already received it while complying with its terms. Switching the license on a new version does not undo the old grant. If you marked a photo as CC BY 4.0 in 2023 and later decide it should be CC BY-NC 4.0, everyone who downloaded it in 2023 can still use it under BY 4.0 for the term of the licensed rights. Reversibility is zero. | Creators who later change their mind about a license |
| User confusion | A user who sees a CC badge on the main page may assume the whole page is free to reuse. If a section of the page is All Rights Reserved, the user may infringe without realising it. Confusion damages both the user and the creator, who may have to send a takedown notice they never wanted to send. | Both parties in the event of a dispute |
| Platform enforcement | A platform that scans for CC-licensed content may not have the granularity to distinguish your video's BY music from its NC footage. The platform may accept a blanket CC statement and then flag the whole work for takedown when a rights holder of the NC part complains. Verification happens at the file level, not the component level. | Creators relying on platform automation |
Reach, Compatibility and Reversibility Trade-Offs in Practice
Reach
Reach is the simplest: a restrictive license on any part of a work shrinks the pool of users who can legally share the whole. A creator who wants maximum reach should put every part under the same permissive license or separate them into distinct files so the user can take only the permissive part.
Compatibility
Compatibility matters most when the work invites remix. If you build a website theme with a CC BY-SA 4.0 stylesheet and a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 set of images, a user who copies both into a new theme cannot share that new theme under any single CC license. The safe step is to use the same license for every part that is intended to be remixed together, or to keep remixable parts in a separate collection with a uniform license.
Reversibility
Reversibility is final. A creator who dual-licenses the same video under two different CC licenses for different parts must accept that the old grant persists. The only way to stop new users from taking the old license is to take the work offline, but that does not affect copies already circulated. A practical decision: if you are unsure about a part, do not license it at all. Mark it as All Rights Reserved until you are certain. You can always add a CC license later; you cannot remove one.
What to Do When You Find Third-Party Material in Your Work
Third-party material is the most common reason to use different licenses for different parts. If you do not own the copyright in a photograph, a music sample, a font or a clip, you cannot license it under CC at all. The only legitimate options are: (1) remove the third-party material entirely; (2) use material that is already in the public domain or under a compatible CC license from the original creator; (3) get a written license or permission from the rights holder that allows you to sublicense; or (4) mark the material as used with separate permission and state that it is not covered by your CC license.
Option 4 is the most common and the most dangerous. A user who downloads your whole work and treats the third-party clip as CC-licensed may infringe. Reduce that risk by putting the third-party material in a separate file with its own notice and by stating in your main license notice: 'The track starting at 3:15 is used under license from Sample Co. and is not CC-licensed.' A responsible user will note that and seek separate permission. An irresponsible user may ignore it, but that is their liability, not yours, provided your notice was clear and visible.
The Safest Next Step for a Creator Considering Multiple Licences
Before you publish, do one thing: list every distinct copyrightable component in the work. For each one, write down who owns it, what license you plan to apply, and whether you have the legal right to apply that license. Then write the license notice for each component. If the notice for one is longer than two sentences, simplify it. If a component has no clear owner, do not license it at all. Then publish the notices together in a single place, the video description, the credits screen, the 'licensing' section of a website, so a downstream user can find every license in one scan. That single step removes the guesswork that causes most disputes over multi-licensed works.
Common Questions
Can I use a CC0 dedication for some parts and a CC BY license for others?
Yes. CC0 is a public-domain dedication, not a license, but you can apply it to one component and a full CC license to another. Mark each component separately. A photo you want to dedicate to the public domain gets a CC0 notice; the accompanying article gets a CC BY 4.0 notice. The user takes what each notice grants.
What happens if I fail to mark which part uses which license?
The legal effect of an ambiguous notice depends on applicable law and the facts. Do not assume either side will receive a favourable interpretation. The safest practice is to be explicit about exclusions from the start.
Does a ShareAlike license on one part force the same license on the other parts?
No. The SA condition applies only to adaptations of that specific part. If you license the text of an article under CC BY-SA 4.0 and the images under CC BY 4.0, a user who adapts only the images does not need to apply SA. If the user adapts the text and the images together into a new work, the text part must stay in a compatible license chain, but the image part does not carry SA.
Can I change the license on one part after I have already published it?
You can stop distributing the current version under the old license, and you can offer new versions under a different license. You cannot withdraw the old license from people who already received a copy while it was in force. If you published a photo as CC BY 4.0 in 2024, anyone who downloaded it in 2024 can still use it under BY 4.0 for the term of the licensed rights, regardless of what you do later.
What if I only own the copyright in part of the work and I do not know who owns the rest?
Do not apply any CC license to the part you do not own. Mark your own part clearly with its license and mark the unknown part as 'Copyright holder unknown. Contact for permission.' Publishing a work with unlicensed third-party material under a blanket CC notice exposes you to a claim of infringement. Remove the unknown material or get permission first.