> CC disagree with that interpretation: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/NonCommercial_interpre https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/NonCommercial_interpr

> CC disagree with that interpretation: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/NonCommercial_interpre https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/NonCommercial_interpre... (also https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Defining_Noncommercial https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Defining_Noncommercial). That's not what I understand from these pages (that only reinforces that even to CC, NonCommercial is not a clear criteria). They also note NonCommercial as “not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation.” which perfectly matches my 3rd case above. For instance, you perfectly can print and display an NC image as a poster in your professional office, it's not "commercial". > That's not a point for ignoring the license. It's definitely an argument to ignore this part of the license: an unenforceable item is effectively void. > If you download pirated movies, games, or other software, it's very unlikely you'll get caught, but you're still committing a crime. Beware, that's different here. Downloading/uploading pirated items is illegal. Here, the NonCommercial clause is so ambiguous that even CC doesn't know how to put it. So its enforcement is even further delicate and open to interpretation.