[WikiEN-l] When Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 license makes sense

[Alphax (Wikipedia email)]

Ryan Delaney wrote:
> On 3/14/06, guru brahma <wikibra at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> 
>>Sometime back, there was a discussion about the unusual license of
>>http://www.panopedia.org/index.php/Panopedia. Within the context of
>>Wikipedia, I was wondering if this license makes any sense at all. I think
>>there are some instances where this MAY make sense. For example, images
>>tagged as GFDL-self could be tagged this way. If I make an image, that is,
>>take a photograph of a leader or an actor I adore and do not want it to be
>>photoshopped into some unknown monstrosity, I would be more comfortable in
>>using Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 license. The same would
>>apply to personal images that I upload on to my userpage. The last thing I
>>want to see in my image my moustache disappear or a beard appear ;). Any
>>thoughts which other areas this admittedly over-restrictive license can be
>>used if at all allowed on wikipedia?
>>
> 
> 
> I don't see any need for this. If you take a picture of Eddie Van Halen, and
> someone photoshops a beard and a corncob pipe onto it, you can be for damn
> sure that this image won't be apperaing on Wikipedia.

What!? You mean that Eddie Van Halen *didn't* have a beard and corncob
pipe? I've been misled! :)

-- 
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 558 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060317/e7528d18/attachment.pgp