In comment #8 of this post I ask Tom Hoffman:
[do you] support the noncommercial propagation of cultural works as a bare minimum right individuals should be entitled to without permission?
Basically, I don’t think the commercial vs. non-commercial distinction is particularly meaningful.
The distinction is important because restricting non-commercial propagation of cultural works (aka “sharing”) is ethically abhorrent. By contrast, restricting commercial use has relatively little ethical significance (for works of a practical nature this is not the case).
While it’s arguable that restricting commercial use may not be the best way to propagate one’s cultural work, the negligible ethical implications of doing so means commercial restrictions should be set apart when defining minimum rights for the public. This leverage is significant.