A few words about licenses
In the last couple of days I got two important informations related to free (and some not so free) licenses.
No one told me that it exists, again 😉
In the world of extensive usage of software on Internet servers, it is obvious that it is completely legal to trick GPL (and other free software licenses) terms and not to give contribution back to the community. I was thinking that GPL should deal with this issue in some future version. However, Affero GPL gave the solution in 2002.
GNU adopted this license and I suppose that we will have possibility to use it in the next year or two. Until that, I’ll switch to the first version of AGPL.
MediaWiki development, for example, should switch to GNU AGPL.
Try to avoid CC
I tried to realize what does NC (non-commercial) mean and I sent an email to CC-community mailing list. In brief, the only answer is that NC is not really NC and that anyone with enough money may trick NC conditions. The most notable examples are YouTube and Flickr.
If it is so with NC, my conclusion is that even contributions given under the conditions of SA (Share Alike) licenses are not safe. Actually, if they are not safe, it is the same as public domain. And if it is so, there is no sense to use it at all. You may simply give your contribution to PD or you may choose some better license.
But, there are no better licenses for images and other non-documentation and non-software works. So, you should think what is the best way to publish your work if it is not software and it is not documentation.
If you need a license for documentation, please stay with GFDL. From version 2 it would be possible to switch to SFDL, which will be more useful.