Comments on: Creative Commons Debuts Study on Noncommercial Use

By: Mastering the intricacies of copyright

Mastering the intricacies of copyright — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 09:19:09 +0000

[...] Obviously that leaves a fair amount of gray area, especially on the Web. This is part of the reason why the Creative Commons Organization recently comissioned a study on commercial use. [...]

By: Cómo utilizar correctamente los trabajos de Creative Commons (Traducción) « El Pollo Hipnótico

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:55:04 +0000

[...] Obviamente eso deja una gran zona sin definir, especialmente en la web. Esta parte es el por qué recientemente la Organización de Creative Commons comisionó un estudio sobre uso comercial. [...]

By: How to Correctly Use Creative Commons Works | PlagiarismToday

How to Correctly Use Creative Commons Works | PlagiarismToday — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:49:11 +0000

[...] that leaves a fair amount of gray area, especially on the Web. This is part of the reason why the Creative Commons Organization recently comissioned a study on commercial use.The good news from the study was that, while there was gray area, users of CC works were more [...]

By: Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:49:17 +0000

Absolutely correct. Sorry about that and it has been fixed!

By: Creative Commons (creativecommons) 's status on Wednesday, 16-Sep-09 16:53:11 UTC - Identi.ca

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:53:14 +0000

[...] http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2009/09/16/creative-commons-debuts-study-on-noncommercial-use/ a few seconds ago from web [...]

By: Marjolein Katsma (marjoleink) 's status on Wednesday, 16-Sep-09 16:33:53 UTC - Identi.ca

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:34:01 +0000

[...] http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2009/09/16/creative-commons-debuts-study-on-noncommercial-use/ a few seconds ago from xmpp [...]

By: Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:29:20 +0000

It seems like you should. Use with advertising on the page was ranked, on average, as just as commercial as selling a copy though the numbers skewed down as elements were added such as individual site and ads just covering their hosting. It's definitely not a cut and dry issue by any stretch but it is always better to be safe than sorry.

By: Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:27:51 +0000

That may be true but the counter-risk is that if they don't define it well enough the courts may well decide what is and is not a commercial use, possibly reaching conclusions counter to the ideals of the CC organization and license users. It seems like they have the balance pretty good at the moment but you are right that there is a risk with doing too much one way or another.

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:24:17 +0000

I was very interested in this study because I use quite a few CC licensed images from flickr on my blog, which does have advertising. Early on, I would email the image owner for persmission if they had specified only non-commercial use, but most people seemed surprised by the question and all of them gave me permission, so I stopped checking. Now I'm wondering if I should still check with the owner every time.

By: leonhard

leonhard — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:43:19 +0000

As I see it, there might be a trade-off between the danger of law-suits and the adoption-rate of Creative Commons licenses: some vagueness in the definition of non-commercial may very well be helpful for a wider spread of the licenses. So, in other words, it might be wise not to resolve some of the conflicting interpretations by (all-too) clear license modifications in version 4.0. (see also Standardizing via Polling?