Creative Commons licenses are a family of standardized copyright licenses that allow creators to share their work with defined permissions while retaining copyright. For website owners, understanding the differences between CC license types is not optional: using a CC BY-NC image on a monetized blog is just as legally problematic as using an unlicensed stock photo. The CC designation tells you the conditions of use, and several CC license types do not permit commercial or business use at all.

The six Creative Commons license types at a glance

Creative Commons publishes six main license combinations, each building on a set of four conditions: Attribution (BY), ShareAlike (SA), NonCommercial (NC), and NoDerivatives (ND).

License	Commercial use	Modifications	Sharing required
CC BY	Yes	Yes	No
CC BY-SA	Yes	Yes	Same license
CC BY-ND	Yes	No	N/A
CC BY-NC	No	Yes	No
CC BY-NC-SA	No	Yes	Same license
CC BY-NC-ND	No	No	N/A

CC0 is a separate category entirely: not a license, but a public domain dedication. The creator waives all copyright rights worldwide. CC0 content can be used for any purpose with no attribution required.

For most business websites, the usable options are CC0, CC BY, CC BY-SA, and CC BY-ND. The NC variants are not available for commercial or monetized use.

What "NonCommercial" actually means for websites

The NC condition prohibits use "primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or monetary compensation." This definition is broader than many site owners expect:

A blog that displays advertising (Google AdSense, banner ads, sponsored posts) is commercial use.
A website that sells products, services, or consulting is commercial use.
A portfolio site that leads to paid client work is generally considered commercial use.
A nonprofit website running a fundraising campaign may constitute commercial use depending on context.

If your website generates revenue or is designed to generate revenue (including indirect revenue through lead generation), you should treat all NC-licensed images as unavailable for your use, even for posts that are not directly selling anything.

The NC boundary is one of the most commonly misunderstood aspects of Creative Commons. Many bloggers assume that because a specific post is just informational and not directly selling anything, NC images are fine. The classification applies to the site as a whole and its commercial orientation, not to the individual page.

What "ShareAlike" means for sites that modify images

The SA condition requires that any derivative work be distributed under the same CC license as the original. For most website use where you display the image as-is, ShareAlike creates no practical burden beyond attribution. However, if you modify a CC BY-SA image (crop it, layer text on it, combine it with another image to create a new graphic), you must license the resulting composite work under CC BY-SA.

This can create complications if you incorporate a CC BY-SA photo into a larger graphic that also contains your own original creative work. The SA condition would require you to release the entire combined image under CC BY-SA, which means you cannot claim full copyright over a design that includes CC BY-SA elements.

Practical recommendation: for designs you want to keep fully under your own control, use CC0 or CC BY (without SA) as your source material.

What "NoDerivatives" means in website contexts

The ND condition prohibits distributing modified versions of the work. You may display the original image but cannot crop it to a new aspect ratio, apply filters or color adjustments, overlay text, or incorporate it into a composite image.

Displaying an image unchanged in an HTML <img> tag is generally considered display, not modification, and is permitted under ND licenses. However, the line can be ambiguous in some contexts: for example, whether resizing an image (which every browser does automatically) constitutes modification is not universally settled. For images you plan to modify in any way, use CC0 or CC BY rather than ND variants.

Reliable sources for CC-licensed images

Wikimedia Commons (commons.wikimedia.org): Millions of CC-licensed and public domain images, including historical photos, diagrams, and maps. Each file page displays the exact license. Attribution information is listed directly on the page.

Openverse (openverse.org): Operated by the WordPress Foundation, Openverse lets you search CC-licensed content from multiple platforms and filter by commercial and derivative-use permission simultaneously. Useful for quick, verified image sourcing.

Flickr Creative Commons: Photographers on Flickr can apply CC licenses to their photos. Search within Flickr and filter by license type under "Any license." Always view the image's individual page to confirm the current license, since photographers can change their license designation.

Smithsonian Open Access (si.edu/openaccess): The Smithsonian Institution has released millions of public domain images from its collections under CC0. Strong source for historical and scientific imagery.

Library of Congress Prints and Photographs (loc.gov/pictures): Large collection of historical US photographs. Many are in the public domain, but check individual items, as some are not.

One note: Unsplash images are not CC-licensed. Unsplash uses a proprietary license (the Unsplash License) that permits free commercial use but is a distinct legal framework with its own conditions. Do not assume Unsplash content is CC-licensed.

How to attribute a CC image correctly

Every CC license except CC0 requires attribution. The Creative Commons organization recommends including four elements, sometimes summarized as TASL:

Title of the work (if the work has one)
Author (creator's name)
Source (URL of where you found the image)
License (type and link to the license text)

A practical attribution format for a website image caption:

"[Title] by [Creator], [Source URL], licensed under CC BY 2.0."

Attribution can appear in an image caption, directly below the image, in an alt-text description, or in a site-wide credits page (though on-page attribution is preferable). Omitting attribution when the license requires it converts a legitimate use to an infringing one, even if you selected the correct license type.

Verifying that a "CC-licensed" image is actually what it claims to be

Not every image labeled as CC-licensed actually is. Anyone can claim a CC license for an image they do not own. When sourcing images, prefer to trace them back to the original creator's Wikimedia Commons page, Flickr account, or other verifiable source rather than downloading from aggregators or secondary posts that claim CC status without documentation.

If you already have images on your site that are supposed to be CC-licensed but you cannot verify the original source, that is a gap worth closing. PixGuard's copyright scanner can flag images that carry IPTC or EXIF metadata identifying them as originating from a commercial stock agency, which would be inconsistent with a CC claim. For further steps on tracing image ownership when source documentation is unclear, see how to find who owns an image.

Common mistakes that turn CC use into infringing use

Downloading from secondary aggregators: Many sites aggregate CC images without verifying licenses. If a site is not the original source, there is no guarantee the license claim is accurate. Go to the original source.

Not saving license documentation: If a photographer later removes the CC license, your existing use remains valid under the license that was in place when you downloaded the image. But you need to be able to demonstrate that. Screenshot or PDF the license page at the time of download.

Using CC images sourced from Google Images results: Google Images shows CC-filtered results, but the filter relies on metadata provided by the hosting site. The metadata can be wrong. Verify at the source before publishing.

Sharing a CC BY-SA image in a way that violates ShareAlike: If you incorporate a CC BY-SA photo into a commercial website design and do not license the composite as CC BY-SA, you are in violation of the SA condition even if you provided attribution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I use CC0 images for commercial purposes with no attribution? Yes. CC0 is a public domain dedication and carries no conditions at all. You can use CC0 images commercially, modify them, republish them, and are not required to attribute the original creator, though noting the source in your own records is good practice.

Can I use a CC BY image in a paid advertisement? Generally yes. CC BY permits commercial use including advertising, provided you include attribution. Verify that the license is CC BY and not CC BY-NC before proceeding, since the two are easy to confuse.

What if I modified a CC BY-ND image by accident? If you inadvertently distributed a modified version of an ND-licensed image, the safest response is to replace it with the unmodified original or with a CC0 or CC BY image you are free to modify. Consult an attorney if the issue involves a formal complaint or demand.

Does Creative Commons protect me from all copyright claims? A CC license protects you only for uses within the scope of that specific license. If you exceed the license conditions (use NC content commercially, skip required attribution, distribute modifications of an ND work), you lose the license protection and the underlying copyright applies fully.

Can I find CC-licensed images through Google Images? Google Images lets you filter by license under Tools. However, Google's CC filter relies on metadata and structured data provided by hosting sites and is not independently verified. Always confirm the license at the original source before publishing the image on your site.

Even properly sourced CC images can carry metadata that signals a different or uncertain origin. Run a free scan at PixGuard to surface copyright risk signals in images already on your website before they become a problem.

Creative Commons licenses explained for website owners