On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 16:13, Georgi Kobilarov <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear backstage team, > > I have a question regarding the backstage data license: > > How does the BBC define non-commercial use? Do you consider a free web > service or website from which no income is generated, but which is run > by a for-profit company, as non-commercial or commercial use?
[Note: this is not an answer to the question, only the BBC can answer that!] Exactly the same problem exists with Creative Commons NC licenses - there isn't a solid definition of what "non-commercial" actually means. The CC actually ran a consultation on it, and were going to do... something, at some point. As far as I know, nothing's happened yet (beyond noting that if you think there's a possibility your usage might be considered 'commercial', you're best off just asking the licensor whether what they think of your proposed use, which does somewhat defeat the purpose of standardised licenses). I really wish somebody could come up with a definition (or at a push, a couple of alternative identifiable definitions) of "commercial" vs "non-commercial" that everyone could get behind (much as in the same way that everybody has a pretty good idea of what "attribution" and "share-alike" entails). M. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
