> I think what was meant is that IBM fears that if they allow z/VM and z/OS > licenses for "personal, non-commercial, educational" use that many businesses > would try to get such a license and use it to run their businesses. I know > that
Yes but if they dont care about the license presumably they'd do that without a license too ? > some FOSS software is "free for non-commercial use", but how would they know > if a company used it internally? > I read a question on a Linux forum on this, wonder if "non-commercial use" > meant non-business use, or "not > for use in software that you sell to others". The definition of "non commercial" is a horribly large problem the detail of which are all rather legal and complicated - and I certainly don't understand them! There is a lot working going in within Creative Commons to try and define it clearly so that the CC "non commercial" licence has a better defined set of meanings for "non commercial" that reflect both the law and the "expected" meanings of "non commercial". Alan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
