[cc-licenses] Version 4:0: suggested change to definition of "noncommercial"
hgmorris at sfu.ca
Wed Apr 4 21:29:34 EDT 2012
Thanks very much to Diane Peters & the CC team on the draft CC-BY-NC-
SA. Good work, I appreciate the background provided, and the continued
support for NC.
I would like to propose a change in the definition of "noncommercial".
Currently, this reads:
(f) NonCommercial means not primarily intended for or directed towards
commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. For purposes of
this Public License, the exchange of the Licensed Work by digital file-
sharing or similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment
of monetary compensation in connection with the exchange.
suggested change to:
(f) NonCommercial means not intended for re-sale or re-use of the
Licensed Work for private monetary compensation (for example, as a
means to attract advertising revenue). For purposes of this Public
License, the exchange of the Licensed Work by digital file-sharing or
similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment of
monetary compensation in connection with the exchange. For the
avoidance of doubt, educational use - teaching and learning - is
Noncommercial, and permitted by this Public License, while including
the content in a package intended for sale to educational institutions
for profit is Commercial, and prohibited by this Public License.
Web-based or other discovery services that rely on advertising
revenue, such as search engines, may use advertising IN CONNECTION
WITH THEIR SERVICES in connecting searchers to this content; this does
not constitute commercial use of the content. Advertising that
constitutes exploitation of the content for commercial purposes, such
as advertising inserted into a derivative, advertising that readers
are forced to watch before viewing the content, creating the
impression of sponsorship, or advertising that implies that the
creator endorses the advertised product, constitutes commercial use
and is prohibited by this license.
After re-reading the Executive Summary of the Defining Noncommercial
report, it strikes me that part of the problem with the overly broad
definition of noncommercial stems from lack of understanding of
copyright by most of the population (as noted in this report). The
idea that you cannot use a work if what you are doing is commercial in
nature, from my perspective, suggests that copyright is not just about
expression of ideas, but rather about ideas themselves. I think this
sets a bad precedent, and it would be a good idea for Creative Commons
to steer away from this.
hgmorris at sfu.ca
More information about the cc-licenses