[Foundation-l] Licenses' biodiversity : my big disagreement with the Wikimedia usability initiative's software specifications

[Teofilo]

I forgot to tell two important pluralistic principles that are
endangered by the upload wizard project :

A) Internationalisation. The CC 3.0 license is an "unported" license.
This means English-based, English speaking countries' jurisdictions
bases, English Common Law based. The 3.0 version is a disappointing
regression from the better 2.0 version.

In contrast, the CC 2.0 licenses have country (and/or language) based
versions such as :

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ca/legalcode.fr
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ca/legalcode.en
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/au/legalcode
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/legalcode

and so on.


B) At present, the possibility to use different upload forms in each
language is the accepted policy on Wikimedia Commons : "You don't need
to have all of the "versions" or options that the English version has.
Choose what is appropriate for speakers of your language, considering
their likely background in Wikimedia. Talk to other users at your
language Village Pump." :
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Redesigning_the_upload_form#Updating_the_form_for_your_language