digging, it does seem to be disallowed. For rationale,
I get pointed
back to either Jimbo's posts on disallowing non-commercial-use media
licenses, fair use, or discussion of downstream use.
None of these reasons seem to apply here. For the free encyclopedia,
a CC-BY-ND media license, for example, is perfectly redistributable,
allows for possible commercial use, and poses no issues for forks or
other downstream use, right?
When we talk about Wikipedia being free, we refer to the 4 freedoms of
free software, as defined by Richard Stallman many years ago:
0. The freedom to copy
1. The freedom to redistribute
2. The freedom to modify
3. The freedom to redistribute modified versions
CC-BY-NC violates at least the last of these.
This is just an unfortunate typo, and you mean CC-BY-ND. Right?