The decision specifically and repeatedly states that the commercial aspect is irrelevant, as such a database "typically has a not insignificant commercial value" – whether the images in this particular case are or can be used commercially or not. See paragraphs 21 and 23.
//Johan Jönsson
Note that "not insignificant" = significant. The decision points exactly that the commercial aspect is relevant, and the artists should have participation on it. "The court finds that the artists are entitled to that value"[1], this is what the decision says, at least according to The Guardian. I couldn't understand the original decision, even if i have had access to it. What is found in these paragraphs you've mentioned?
CasteloBranco
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/05/wikimedias-free-photo-database-...