Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mia Garlick <mia AT creativecommons.org>]

actually, at the risk of starting the NonCommercial discussion again  
(which has already been extensively debated on the list if you review  
the archives) and is not part of the Version 3.0 discussion (to which  
your email was sent in reply) what NC means depends on the intention  
of the licensor when applying the license condition to their work.   
CC has a discussion draft of NonCommercial Guidelines in an effort to  
clarify what the term means (see http://wiki.creativecommons.org/ 
NonCommercial_Guidelines); *such* Guidelines are, as the name  
suggests, not finalized or definitive however, they do not make a  
distinction based on whether the ads are used to pay just for  
bandwidth or not.

On Nov 1, 2006, at 6:34 AM, Pascal Muller wrote:

> On 11/1/06, Jim Sowers <jim AT spincycle.org> wrote:
>
> Q: Does taking content that has a non-commercial restriction and  
> using on a website that runs AdSense violate the non-comm.  
> restriction?  Assume that the primary driver of traffic is the use  
> of CC licensed content?
>
> The language in the license in 4 (c) is: "You may not exercise any  
> of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above
> in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward  
> commercial advantage or private monetary compensation."
>
> Seems like this could cover a lot of AdSense-based sites.  Just  
> wondering what the current thinking is on this.
>
> If those ads are to pay exclusively for the bandwidth bill, and not  
> to make a profit out of it, I guess it's allowed, because it isn't  
> cial advantage in that case..
>
>
> --
> Pascal Muller
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses