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

[guru brahma]

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?
   
  regards,
  Gurubrahma.

				
---------------------------------
 Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket
Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time.