>Example 2: A Fortune 500 firm has outsourced the development of its store-locator mobile application to a small agency.
>The application is not an open source project. The agency has 5 employees working on the project and would like to use
>Visual Studio Community 2015. Since the agency is a contractor developing this application for the Fortune 500 firm, and
>since the application is not an open source project, the agency cannot use Visual Studio Community 2015 for developing
>and testing the application.
>
>In my case (for a particular project) a company wants to hire my company to maintain their software. I think that from the above example I can extrapolate that once the hiring company has less than 250 PCs and less than US$1M in annual revenue (will that be for the last financial year?) it should be OK for me to use the community edition. That is your interpretation, correct?

Unless there is/was a somewhat obscure intent on MS side that only "owned" sources besides the teaching and OS areas are allowed. Which I cannot find in the "For all other usage scenarios: In non-enterprise organizations up to 5 users can use Visual Studio Community."
BUT: If the hiring company is relevant as the example suggests, it could be argued that it is up to you to make certain not more than 4 others use CE - which is totally ludicrous IMO, but that might not matter to MS ;-))

The whole example flies against the wording of that sentence - which makes me suspicious ;-)

>
>If so, I wonder if I can convince a privately owned company to tell me if their annual revenue was more or less than US$1M. :o)

Hah! Here such info can be read in a central register, where corporations above a threshold (much lower than enterprize...) have to publish their basic financial data - believed to be a security measure so that other biz can estimate the (prob)ability to be around in a few months after entering into a contract.