"Commercial = I make money from using this; Non-commercial = NOT commercial
"
False. There are cases where commercial was held to mean "any use by a for profit company, regardless if the use is research, earns money directly or indirectly", etc.
False. There are cases where commercial was held to mean "any use by a for profit company, regardless if the use is research, earns money directly or indirectly", etc.
Although if you speak to a lawyer I'm sure their training would immediately start highlighting this as a concern I don't believe it should be in the vast majority of cases. Wasn't there an article on HN a few days ago basically summarising this type of concern under "so sue me" (minus expletives)
So if I use a software package commercially and don't pay for it perhaps the maximum I could be sued for in the local courts would be the license fee I didn't pay. If there is no "commercial" license then could it really be said that a loss has been suffered?
[NB I know contracts and licenses usually have clauses stating the jurisdiction where disputes will be resolved]