Last December, at GL5 in Amsterdam, many of the authors and researchers reiterated the Luxembourg Convention on grey literature. Some questioned if it were not time to rethink the definition, some offered moderations, but not one called for its complete elimination or abolition. During the course of the authors’ presentations, specific attributes of grey were brought to lively discussion and debate. However, time and circumstance being known limitations on this kind of interaction and communication, ensured that more issues and questions were raised than could be adequately addressed. At the close of GL5, the idea came to devise a research project capturing the main issues and questions raised and to systematically hold them up to the Luxembourg definition of grey literature to examine where redefinition if any is needed. Both authors are well aware of crossovers, bypasses, and at times a Fata Morgana as to what is grey or commercial on the information highway, but then they poise the question, where would be today without definition? The dichotomy grey versus commercial is one found both in the definition following the York Seminar (Wood, 1984) “…not available through normal bookselling channels” and the definition redefined at the Luxembourg Conference (1997) “...