definiton of "commercial use" RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses

[Joachim.Meier@ptb.de]

A few month ago I signed a License agreement with the Royal 
Society of Chemistry, in which "commercial use" was defined in a 
way most of us can agree on, I suppose.

Definitions, 1 b. "Commercial Use: the use of the Licensed 
Material for the purpose of monetary reward (whether by or for 
the Institution of an Authorised User) by means of sale, resale, 
loan, transfer, hire or other form of exploitation of the 
Licensed Material.

"For the avoidance of doubt, the use by the Institution or 
Authorised Users of the Licensed Material in the course of 
research funded by a commercial organisation is not deemed to 
constitute Commercial Use. Recovery of costs is not being deemed 
Commercial Use. "

Greetings
Joachim Meier
____________________________________________________
Dr.- Ing. Joachim E. Meier
Head of Library
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt
(http://www.ptb.de)
38023 Braunschweig
GERMANY
E-mail: Joachim.Meier@ptb.de
____________________________________________________


Von: Sandy Thatcher <sandy.thatcher@alumni.princeton.edu>
An: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Datum: 02.03.2011 23:56
Betreff: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses

While I agree about the general utility of CC licenses, I wish 
someone could explain to me what the difference between 
"commercial" and "noncommercial" use is. The CC itself conducted 
a survey a couple of years ago and found little consensus beyond 
a very small core of shared understanding of what the distinction 
connotes. This is not just a philosophical concern, since very 
real practical consequences depend on knowing the difference as 
it applies to various publishing ventures.

Sandy Thatcher


>The best licensing in existence for scholarly communication, 
>IMHO, is CC licensing, as this simplifies understanding of how 
>materials can be used. CC licenses are used by 
>subscriptions-based as well as open access publishers. Of 
>course, this does not help when we are licensing resources from 
>vendors / publishers who do not use CC licenses. The reason that 
>I bring this up is because all of us who work with vendors at 
>any level can play a useful role in helping them to understand 
>the current and evolving needs of scholarship, so that they can 
>develop practices which will help them to survive and thrive 
>into the future.
>
>best,
>
>Heather G. Morrison
>Project Coordinator
>BC Electronic Library Network