As Timothy Vollmer reports, "A few days ago the Students for Free Culture (SFC) published a provocative blog post called “Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0.” The article urged Creative Commons to deprecate (meaning 'retire' or similar), or otherwise change the way Creative Commons offers licenses containing the NonCommercial and NoDerivatives terms, because they 'do not actually contribute to a shared commons.'" This Creative Commons post responds to that demand, saying, essentially, that they'll think about it. As I have stated before, licenses that allow vendors to charge people for access to resources are not more free, they are (clearly and obviously) less free. And I think the constant push to eliminate or otherwise depreciate 'non-commercial' licensing is a longstanding lobby from the content publishing industry in an effort to depreciate Creative Commons itself. And again, if Create Commons listens to its users they will find people using the non-commercial twice as often, as they do at Flickr. And that's why the publishers are going after Creative Commons itself - because after years of trying, they can't convince people that selling their work is the best way of distributing it for free.