I'm not sure this addressing the criteria of the licensing.  How would
you stop "commercial" purposes?

Say I work for a UK-based vendor that starts with a "T" (as hard as
that may seem) and I devise a script (or, even more crazily, have root
access to the server to the server that the Berman catalog runs on...)
that pulls the data into publicly accessible Platform store.  You
know, for the common good.

Some random developer then uses that Platform store, builds an
interface on, because, you know, Berman data!  It's cool!  But they
have Google Ads in their interface.

Some (admittedly small) amount of money changes hands from Google to developer.

UIUC decides to sue since this against their licensing terms.

Who's liable?

Go!
-Ross.
p.s.  The answer here is for UIUC to license this under an open data
license -- NOT for a developer to "release and pray".

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 9:42 PM, md <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> In regard to Harvey's concerns about the license agreement for the
> Berman catalog:
>
> The catalog IS publicly available on the Sanford Berman website and
> has been for about 3 years.   Ed began development of a Ruby application.
> His work was very important and very appreciated....just not finished.
>
> The license agreement states that you must use the databases for
> scholarly, education and research purposes, not for commercial or
> other purposes.    That's how I'm using the databases.    That's how
> I imagine everyone would use them.
>
> Ruby was one solution but I'm open to others.
>
> The structure of Berman's work is so complex and beautiful,
> the content so innovative and global that I would think anyone
> with an OSS Opac...Koha etc. would welcome the honor
> and the challenge of giving Berman's work a new environment
> to live in.
>
> So who among you will accept the challenge?
>
> ---Madeline Douglass
> [log in to unmask]
>