Definitely not, you would have no legal standing, and yes that would be very selfish. Artists here work hard to produce content that they are choosing to share with the community. The entire purpose would be lost if someone could come and literally snatch that work out from the community. Consider the original artist - would THEY still be able to use their own work, after you have copyrighted it (which again, you cannot do)?

If you want artwork that nobody else can copy from your original game, then you must create it yourself or negotiate a deal with an artist to create it for you. Note there are several highly talented artists here who advertise their services for fees, and a whole commissions forum devoted to connecting artists with developers http://opengameart.org/forums/open-commissions

That would defeat the purpose of the public domain, and could get you sued:

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Happy-Birthday-Lawsuit-Settlemen...

http://petapixel.com/2016/08/04/getty-images-sued-accused-misusing-47000...

If you can prove that you created the asset before its artist created it and released under CC-0.

You can always copyright the version used in your game though, So no one can use that version. But they can still use the CC-0 version.

Thus if you want full control of something either create it yourself or pay someone to create it under your terms.

It is foolish to claim something that belongs to or freely accessible by everyone

What a horrible thing to ask.

You think you interests are more important than those of the person who actually created the work (the artist), who is graciously allowing you to make use of it?

You think you deserve to deprive everyone else of the work?

This speaks a great deal about your character.

if you could do this any image that was cc0 and half decent would be snatched up by someone to claim ownership. Thankfully they cant so there is still lots of decent free cc0 stuff to use

That Getty article is a little scary. Im staying away from that company for sure.

Make millions without moving a hand from others' work.

As horrible as the question is, it is still a legitimate question. Please keep it respectful when responding, everyone. Do not discourage people from asking questions about copyleft. 

@OP: as you've probably gathered, the simple answer is no. you cannot copyright something in the public domain. As mold suggested, you could probably copyright a derivative of the work, but it would be 1) pretty rude and 2) not really very effective since people could just use the original for free and however they want. 

You can copyright your game code and other assets besides that sprite, but that sprite doesn't actually belong to you. It belongs to me and Surt and mold and Boom Shaka and everyone else (including you in part)

Is the copyright of the game itself (and not every last part of the game) not sufficient?

He isn't just asking in the abstract, he is saying he wants to do this deplorable thing and even admits that he recognizes it as such.

I'm going to assume the question is rhetorical (or maybe a troll). So I'll be polite (and risk feeding the troll, if that's it).

You can't prevent everyone else from doing anything they want to do with CC0 art, period. Not even if you originally made it. Once the copyright owner releases it as CC0, other people can use it for anything at all. Trying to prevent anyone from using it is a thing called copyfraud. That's both bad and illegal. (Since sometimes there's a difference I have to point out that it's both.) That could lead to a hefty legal fee and your heart shriveling up like a pea drying in the hot sands, metaphorically speaking.

If you own copyright to another batch of art and want to use it and say that nobody else can, you need to ether do the work or pay for the work to be done for you. And then sue out of existence anyone who tries to anyway, because sometimes people do (those with pea hearts).

It's not just a legal thing but a moral thing. If you lack both you'd have to own several judges outright to even maybe make some headway. But since you can't simply pay for art I'm assuming mass legal corruption isn't possible for you right now.

What other people say, basically.

As far as I know, you can use the sprite and still copyright your game...you just can't claim exclusive license over the sprite itself nor can you prevent anybody else from using it in their own game.  If you could, it would defeat the purpose of having a public domain in the first place.

If you're really serious about it, though, you should talk to a lawyer that specializes in intellectual property rights....they'll be able to give you a more objective review of your options.

You have no copyright interest (whether "standing", "title", "ownership", or "license") in someone else's work, by default.  What CC0 means is that someone has essentially relinquished control over a particular piece of work such that copyright is functionally no longer in effect, the same as though the work has passed into the public domain through elapsed time.  The public libre licenses used on this site don't give you any special rights or privileges of any kind, however.  There is absolutely nothing you can do to prevent someone else from taking exactly the same works from this site and using them under the same terms you got them.  If you don't like that, it's time to start paying for or producing your own work.

Note that none of this has anything to do with copyright interests you may have in OTHER works that you produced or paid for.  Every work has its own independent copyright, and potentially even many different independent licenses that can all apply simultaneously.

I will second the recommendation to speak to a practicing and qualified IP lawyer before you take any public actions on this or any other related matter.  You would be far from the first person/company to get into hot water over severe ignorance of the law and/or prevailing public opinion.

"Phew, that was a lot to read. I have no intention to offend anyone, and this is a legitimate question. How can I make the sprite not be affected by my copyright if I now decide to use it? Can I use it? Thanks in advance." -- HenrikoMagnifico

If I understand correctly, you want to leave a note or credit in order to let those who play your game know you're using a public domain asset for your game, eg a sprite, so that they know it's not a copyrighted asset to you, but something they can use as well.

The best practice, in my opinion, is to credit the artist anyway, regardless of whether it was Public Domain, CC-BY-SA, or CC-BY, or GPL. In example, "X-Sprite" by "Mr. X -- Public Domain Image(s) -- (Download link)," or, use the Attribution notice verbatum from the original download link, if available. That covers you and lets the player of your game know that they too can use the sprite and that it's not specific to your game, and it's both flattering and curteous to the original artist. I will be using that format myself when I go to use some assets I found here in my game that are public domain.

I hope that helps answer your question. (Mods: If I'm wrong, please correct me.)

It's not wrong to use the sprite -- it's what it's there for. All you have to do is credit and you'll be ok. There's no shame or guilt in using something someone made for you to use with proper credit (and linking back to that single aspect on OGA or wherever you got it from.)

If you need another sprite for your game, or some 2-D pixel art, I can see what I can do for you myself. I release all my work mainly under CC-BY and CC-BY-SA (depending on how someone edits the work in question,) but if you need a sprite for your game, let me know and I'll see what I can do for you. I also generally do my work for free or donations. I'll even release it for your use exclusively, all I ask is that you credit me for making it is all. ♥

Check out my deviant art page for my full portfolio: http://cougarmint.deviantart.com/

I feel the need to quote http://www.lostgarden.com/2007/12/how-to-bootstrap-your-indie-art-needs.html, becuase it was a big revelation for me:

You browse free game graphics archives, but your customers do not. Out of the thousands of people that play your game, only a small handful will recognize that you are using free graphics. The only ones who care are typically merely would-be game developers snobs. Ignore them. That is easy enough.

^this +1

No offence but I am a little perturbed by your question.

Do I understand you correctly?

There is a sprite which someone else made and instead of selling it for money they decided to share it freely so that anyone and everyone would have a nice sprite free of charge. Now you (who did not make this nor contribute to it in any way) want to claim it as your own, making it impossible for A) the artist who created it and  B) anyone else to use it without your permission. 

This is because you think this will be less work than drawing your own sprite or getting a friend to do so?

Look, I don't mean to flame you, but in my experience there are certain things in human behavior which I can not understand nor account for. Such things as rape, as a super-rich multinational corporation having a peaceful indigenous community who lived in harmony with nature throw off their land using violence, etc, so that the company could get at a resource that they would have to destroy the area in order to get, just for a litttle money until the resource is depleted; the other thing is people going to war over a minor difference in the interperetaions of a few passages in their scriptures... I dispair at such things!

And without passing any judgement on your character, I'm afraid that if I understand your question correctly, then I will add what you want to do to the list of things I can not account for.

I am very busy these days, I have found a job which I love and where my skills are greatly appreciated, I also do voluntary work without pay to support a cause I believe in and help people - apart from that, I don't mean to get ahead of myself but I think it is safe to say that at present my love-life is not looking completely and utterly hopeless(?) - but seriously, I will give up my time and energy in order to create a sprite for you that you can copyright if you promise to never NEVER try to copyright work someone else created in order to freely share with others. 

The technical term for that is a "dick move".

Good luck with your game.

You can copyright your own derivative work of something that was public domain, but the original content stays public domain and anyone can use it. So you have to modify it yourself to create something new, then you can copyright it.

And those modifications would have to rise to the level of being a "new artistic creation" to be elligible for a new copyright. Simple color changes, as one example, would not cut it, because anyone could do that.

Not for CC0 (the license OP was referring to). You can relicense that without changing the asset at all. That is generally ineffective since people can just use the CC0 version (which still exists in perpetuity) and disregard the identical relicensed version. So, really someone would only need to deviate from the original asset enough for others to take notice of it despite the more restrictive license.

I should point out HenrikoMagnifico has indicated he considers the issue concluded, so continuing to argue here what can or should be done, ethically or legally, is probably not going to make much difference over what has already been stated.

...On the other hand, I did just respond to a thread I feel needs no further responses. :P

Yeah, I kind of missed what he said about using his friend's sprite. Sorry

again, good luck.

I would agree it's kind of a moot point now, but I have no idea what MedicineStorm is saying.

"You can relicense that without changing the asset at all." Public domain is public domain. You can give credit like OGA-By or whatnot -- voluntarily -- but you can't force anyone to follow your lead. You can't own it. Doesn't work that way. That's copyfraud, which is illegal.

"So, really someone would only need to deviate from the original asset enough for others to take notice of it despite the more restrictive license." Taking notice of a change doesn't give you or anyone else copyright. Copyright is solely for artistic work. If you haven't done any (or paid to license someone else's), you don't get it even if you claim it. Color change does not rise to the level required. "Sweat of the brow" work is explicitly not covered. Changing a JPG to PNG does not count. Photographing a two dimensional object without additions does not cut it. Artistic changes would (but the original still exists as CC0).

I think we're saying the same thing for the most part, actually. I just said it stupidly.

I can relicense something that is cc0 to be CC-BY-SA. I don't even have to change it. But no one would care, because the CC0 version is still available as CC0. It's kinda like if there was a "free lemonade" stand on the street. I could ask for a few free cups, then use it to open another lemonade stand right next door, but sell it for $5. No one's going to buy my lemonade when it's free right next door, but I'm still ALLOWED to sell it.

Like you said, I can't force anyone to follow my lead. Like I said, people can just use the CC0 version and disregard the identical relicensed version. Nor could I claim it was mine, but that isn't something I was suggesting, only relicensing it. My point about deviating from the original asset was saying, "no one is going to bother buying my lemonade unless it's different enough from the free stuff for people to be willing to fork over 5 bucks for it."

I really just misread "to be elligible for a new copyright." to say "to be elligible for a new license." my bad. :) 

EDIT: I am not condoning the taking of free lemonade in order to resell it for a profit. This is all just for the sake of argument, not ethics. 

I don't get why you make so much drama, there is no problem with relicensing. Any free open source license content that is not copyleft can be copyrighted. With public domain you don't even have to follow any rules, except that you cannot claim ownership over the original content.