Free stock footage for commercial use: what the licences mean
Updated · 3 min read
Short answer
Free footage is safe for a commercial video when its licence allows commercial use and nothing in the frame needs a release. CC0 and public-domain clips need nothing; CC BY and NASA media need a credit line; CC BY-SA forces your whole video under the same licence; NC and ND licences rule it out. Separately, footage showing identifiable people, logos or insignia without releases is editorial-only: fine for news and documentary, not for ads.
Two questions, not one
Whether a clip can go into a commercial video depends on two separate things:
- The copyright licence. Does the owner of the footage allow commercial use, and on what conditions (credit, share-alike, no changes)?
- What is in the frame. Do identifiable people, logos, products, artworks or insignia appear, and were releases signed for them?
A clip can pass the first test and fail the second. NASA footage of astronauts is a good example: not copyrighted in the US, but NASA asks for permission before identifiable astronauts appear in ads. That is why every result here carries both a verdict and an editorial flag.
The licences, from most to least permissive
| Licence | Commercial use | Conditions | Verdict here |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public domain, CC0 | Yes | None | Commercial use OK |
| US federal government work | Yes | None in the US; trademarks and people still apply | Commercial use OK |
| NASA media | Yes | Credit NASA, no insignia, no implied endorsement | OK with credit, editorial |
| CC BY | Yes | Credit title, author, source, licence; note changes | OK with credit |
| CC BY-SA | Yes, but | Your whole video must carry the same licence | Restricted |
| CC BY-NC | No | Non-commercial only | Non-commercial only |
| CC BY-ND | In practice no | No adapted versions: trimming and grading inside an edit generally counts | Non-commercial only |
| Free stock site licences (Pexels, Pixabay…) | Yes | No reselling the clips as they are; rules about people | Read on the site |
| Paid stock | After you pay | Per clip or subscription | Needs a paid licence |
What “commercial” means
Creative Commons defines non-commercial use as use “not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation”. In practice, treat these as commercial: ads and sponsored posts, client and agency work, product and marketing videos, monetised channels, paid courses, and anything made for a business. Personal projects, school assignments and non-profit educational screenings are usually not.
Where free, commercial-safe footage comes from
- Wikimedia Commons only accepts free licences, mostly CC0, public domain, CC BY and CC BY-SA, and records the licence per file.
- NASA (the Image and Video Library and the Scientific Visualization Studio) publishes footage that is generally not copyrighted in the US, with credit and endorsement rules.
- The Internet Archive holds public-domain and Creative Commons films, but most licences there are set by uploaders, so they need checking.
- Free stock sites such as Pexels and Pixabay have their own free licences. They can’t be searched automatically, so every search links to the same query there.
Turn on Commercial-safe in the search (or commercial=true in the API) to keep only the green verdicts, then check the editorial flag before you put a clip in an ad.
Questions
- Does a monetised YouTube channel count as commercial use?
- For licence purposes, treat it as commercial: the video earns money. Creative Commons defines non-commercial as use not primarily intended for commercial advantage or monetary compensation, and many rights holders read monetised channels as commercial. Use clips that are cleared for commercial use.
- Is 'royalty free' the same as 'free'?
- No. Royalty free means you don't pay per view or per use after getting the licence, which may itself cost money. It also says nothing about credit, redistribution or editorial restrictions: read the licence.
- Can I use public-domain footage of a famous person in an ad?
- Copyright is only one layer. A person's right of publicity (or their estate's) and trademark law can still apply, so footage of a recognisable person in an ad needs their or their estate's permission even when the film itself is public domain.
- What if the source states no licence?
- Treat it as all rights reserved: you would need the owner's permission. Such clips get the 'check the terms' verdict here.
Try it
Live searches across every source, with a licence verdict on each result.
Sources
Practical information, not legal advice. AI agent? This guide is also available as Markdown.
