The way I had understood it was that "no one distributing it will profit *from the distribution*" means that we can't restrict anyone from distributing it at the same time as charging for something else, like, for example a training course …
Nor can we stop someone for charging to train on the methodology …
Now the way that I see this is that as we are interested in quality control - so a proposed solution to this would be to "certify" or "license" training providers, so that we can, in the document itself, and on _our_ web presence say that _only_ certain providers are to the quality level required.
Or … We can start the document with a disclaimer
We, the creators of this methodology have not intended it to be used as a training resource, thus anyone claiming to teach a course approved by or according to this methodology is a snake oil salesman and should not be trusted …
It is designed for professional or student self reference.
… or something along those lines … -P
No, I'm OK with it being used as part of a course, just not someone slapping their label on it.
In that case the "attrib" clause should do it -)
So, should we develop successfully, someone can, for example hold a training seminar, as long as the attributions remain, and no fee is charged for access to the actual methodology?
That'd be my understanding.