Hi – I agree with you Jason and considered the possibility of devising statement on what an institution, for example, would consider non-commercial.  I talked myself out of that on the basis that I thought institutions should consider the issues in a business sense depending upon what is being made available and for what purpose. If that requires a statement – then good.  If not then I would perhaps avoid recommending a standard (institutional) statement – which at times could be  – cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

Cheers Bernie

 

 

 

 

It’s a question that has come up from time to time here at Jisc Legal.  Legally, ‘non-commercial’ is part of the permission for use granted by the licensor to the user, and, as such, has to be interpreted in each individual context.  Great for flexibility, poor for certainty.  That’s why, when Creative Commons themselves commissioned a report on the interpretation of ‘non-commercial’ a few years ago, it basically came back with “it depends on the circumstances” (cf http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Defining_Noncommercial).

 

Nothing prevents the creators of CC-licensed material from stating what they consider to be commercial/non-commercial, and perhaps there’s room for some model statements to that effect.  One difficulty in formulating agreement is that (as per the CC report) the definition is likely to change through time, and its not easy to identify a range of appropriate stakeholders from the creator side (otherwise any ‘consensus’ is one-sided).

 

The good news is that ‘education’ doesn’t need to be defined, as it’s not a term used in the CC licensing scheme.

 

Cheers,

Jason

Jason Miles-Campbell | Manager | Jisc Legal | T 0141 548 2889  | E [log in to unmask]

Visit our website: www.jisclegal.ac.uk
Subscribe to our newsletter: www.jisclegal.ac.uk/newsletter
Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/jisclegal
Tune in via Vimeo: vimeo.com/jisclegal
Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/company/jisc-legal

Jisc Legal,  a Jisc Advance service, is hosted by the University of Strathclyde, a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC015263

 

 

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

> On Behalf Of Lorna Campbell

> Sent: 23 July 2013 16:29

> To: [log in to unmask]

> Subject: Use of CC NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?

>

> Hi there,

>

> Earlier today there was a short but lively discussion on twitter about the pros,

> cons and ambiguities of using the CC NC licence in academic contexts.   I'm

> sure many of your will be aware of the complex issues that this raises,

> particularly with regard to whether or not education is regarded as a

> commercial activity.  If anything, these issues have become more pressing

> with the advent of commercial MOOC providers such as FutureLearn.   Trying

> to define "commercial" "non-commercial" and even "education" in global

> terms is a difficult task if not impossible task, however our twitter discussion

> this morning led David Kernohan to ask if it might be possible to define what

> these terms mean within the context of our own community, i.e. UK F/HE.

> So what do you think, is there any mileage in trying to agree how and in what

> context the CC NC licence can be used appropriately within UK Higher and

> Further Education?  What are the chances of us being able to reach a

> consensus?  Would it be useful just to air the issues?   Let us know what you

> think!

>

> Cheers

> Lorna

>

> --

> Lorna M. Campbell

> CETIS Assistant Director

> Email:

> l<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]<mailto:orna.m.ca

[log in to unmask]">> [log in to unmask]>

> Skype: lorna120768