What's the difference between open source, copyleft and Creative Commons?

Open source, copyleft and Creative Commons are related ideas, but they are not synonyms. Open source describes software whose source code is available under a licence that permits specified forms of use, study, modification and redistribution. Copyleft is a licensing principle that requires modified or redistributed versions to preserve particular freedoms, while Creative Commons provides licences mainly for creative works such as text, images, music and video.

Open source: The focus is software and access to its source code. An open-source licence may allow users to inspect, modify and share the code, but the exact permissions depend on the licence. Some open-source licences are permissive, allowing modified versions to be distributed under different terms.

Copyleft: Copyleft is not a separate type of media. It is a condition used in some licences, including some open-source software licences. If a creator distributes a modified version under a copyleft licence, they generally must make the corresponding source code available under compatible terms. This is intended to prevent later versions from removing the freedoms granted by the original creator.

Creative Commons: Creative Commons is a family of standard licences for copyright-protected creative works. Creators can choose conditions such as attribution, non-commercial use, no derivatives or share-alike. Share-alike is the Creative Commons condition most closely related to copyleft because adaptations must normally be shared under the same or a compatible licence.

The common misconception is that “free” always means “without rules.” In IB Digital Society’s media topic, licensing shows how values and ethics, power and expression shape digital media ownership and reuse. In an exam, define each term, compare their scope, and explain that the licence conditions determine what users may legally do.