Re: A possible GFDL compromise

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

    To use one page of the GFDL-licensed work required one paragraph in the
    Copyright page, the page I wanted to use, and a copy of the GFDL (so far the
    same), plus:
    1. the required front-cover text (on a page by itself before the excerpt:
    "bracket" in the terms of the GFDL),
    2. the required invariant sections (several pages), and
    3. the required back-cover text (on a page by itself after the excerpt and
    the invariant sections).

In both cases, the other required material is much larger than the
text you want to use.  Meanwhile, I think that you can in most cases
avoid separate pages for the cover texts.

Do you believe there is some limiting size of license, beyond which
the license automatically becomes non-free regardless of its text?  If
not, this argument seems to be a double standard.

    Do data CDs "commonly have printed covers" (jewel case inserts)?  Would
    pressing a CD (rather than burning a CDR) be considered "printing"?

Yes, it definitely is.  If you press a CD whose contents are only or
mainly a single GFDL-covered manual, then you need to put the cover texts
on the CD itself or on the jewel box insert.

However, if the CD contains a large aggregation such as a GNU/Linux
distribution, section 7 says that the cover texts can go on the
electronic equivalent of covers, in the manual itself.  So in this
case there is no requirement to print anything on the CD or the jewel
box insert.