The Wikipedia community and free-culture movement supporters are familiar with the concept of using free licenses for copyright activism. The most visible licenses in the Wikimedia platform are Creative Commons licenses which apply to media including text, images, and the Wikidata structured data collection, but open-source licenses also support all the Wikimedia software. Going into the past, there has been a debate between community-centered activists who advocated for free software ideology and the reciprocal copyleft licenses which favor people first, versus open-source software proponents who recommend the permissive software licenses which, while they benefit the Commons and are good, gained practical acceptance for being corporation- and business-centered. Conversations around licenses have been long running in the open access movement for scholarly publications, open data movement, open science, and open hardware
This discussion will not further revisit any of those previous conversations, but newcomers to licensing should be aware that a discourse since the 1980s exists without reconciliation, and some directions of argument could change with new social and technological developments. Here we introduce and review examples of "ethical licenses", which are such a development. Whereas the popular licenses use copyright as the basis for regulating the use of resources, ethical licenses attempt regulation with ethical rather than legal foundations.
https://ethicalsource.dev/licenses/
This is a license for reuse of 3D digital fursuits. https://tsukurunomori.co.jp/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/feiling_vn3license_eng.pdf
Here are traditional knowledge labels.
These are like Creative Commons licenses which name restrictions, but for example, you can only look at works during certain times a year, or if you are a certain gender.
Interesting licenses here are different ways for an institution to say they looked but failed to find copyright info https://rightsstatements.org/page/1.0/?language=en
model releases