[open-bibliography] Antw: Re: BL data available under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

• Previous message: [open-bibliography] Antw: Re: BL data available under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
• Next message: [open-bibliography] Second RLUK Conference - Edinburgh - 10-12 November 2010
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

"Noncommercial" is hard to define and AFAIK it doesn't have an
established legal definition.  The article linked from the following
page might be useful to someone who wants to dive deeper:

   http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Defining_Noncommercial

In the case of OCLC (and similar nonprofits such as W3C, Crossref, and
CAS) the question is whether the nonprofit is using the work for
financial gain. I can't predict what a court would say.

I don't monitor this list regularly. If in the future you have
Creative Commons related questions you might want to cc: me (so to
speak) or email me directly.

Best
Jonathan

• Previous message: [open-bibliography] Antw: Re: BL data available under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
• Next message: [open-bibliography] Second RLUK Conference - Edinburgh - 10-12 November 2010
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]