You will enjoy David Wiley's future history of open source even if it is ultimately a sustained argument for the abolition of the non-commercial clause in Creative Commons licensing (drawing on the previously noted conflict between what Creative Commons says the clause means and what MIT says it means). I stand by my defense of the clause and by my non-technical interpretation (specifically - if you're making money off it, it's commercial, and if you have to ask whether or not a use is commercial, it's commercial). Wiley also felt compelled to write a subsequent defense of MIT OCW. Not that I would ever doubt his support either for open courseware or MIT's version of it. And while Wiley's own passion for a future of open courseware may never merit 15 minutes on CNN, it should be known that there are other criteria more meaningful, and that his own work, as much as anything done over at MIT, is significant. It is not, after all, the size of the wallet that you open to support a thing, but rather, how much of your heart you give to it. I'm sure Wiley would be the first to agree.