[sbarre]

When this conversation came up on Reddit a while back, someone made the same point as you, and I replied (more or less) this back then too:

These terms apply to the free usage of their API.

I have no doubt that if you had a good idea that monetized their API data well, and you wanted to do things not allowed by this default license agreement, you could reach out to them and get a different license that allowed you to charge money and/or do more, probably in exchange for a revenue sharing or something.

Since this is a new(ish) service, they are probably not actively promoting a paid option while they hammer out any bugs or issues in v1 (since the SLA for paying customers is likely more involved).

Obviously this is all speculation, but just because this is the license displayed on the site doesn't mean it's the only license they are prepared to offer.

[chaostheory]

Unless they have a public price, I'd be wary. When you have to ask for cost, it's usually about 5-6 figures for year of access.

Still, it's a start.

[sbarre]

Well, again it probably depends on your idea, and what the potential revenue is.

It's also possible that they have no idea what to charge for their API right now, and they are waiting to see what kinds of offers come in.

That's also smart (or ruthless?) since it allows them to tailor their price to your idea (i.e. maximize their share of the potential revenue).

I hope people figure out cool things to do with this though.

[awad]

The lower end of that is perfectly in line with what you'd be paying other providers for commercial services.