[gold stinger]

Originally Posted by trumaestro

The consensus on creative commons licenses for FFR is that ND is generally a no-go. FFR could be considered building upon the work which ND explicitly denies. Version 1.0 appears to be okay, but that's a grey area. This website's copyright date is in 2009 and creative commons was at 3.0 by then.

Other licenses are okay.

Can confirm this. ND is a no-go. tl;dr, 'adaptive works' were not originally classified as a derivative in 1.0 versions of the license, which is what FFR falls under, since we're adapting the work to be in sync with other content. All ND-related licenses have specifically pointed this out and included adaptive works as a derivative in all licenses beyond 1.0 stating:

For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.