Nyenyec N wrote:

What is the definitive source to read about which image licenses are compatible with the GFDL?

Or perhaps a GFDL text with non-GFDL images added doesn't count as derivative work?

There is a slightly related discussion on meta, http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Do_fair_use_images_violate_the_GFDL%3F Do fair use images violate the GFDL?

In it Jimbo seems to argue that the addition of fair use images does not mean that the images become GFDL, but rather that the usage of the specific images in such a way become compliant with the GFDL. At least that is my reading of the comments. The position I base that upon is his argument:

"The experts I have consulted on this (including Richard Stallman and Larry Lessig) find no merit in this argument. Remember that the GNU FDL works inside the framework of copyright law. The GNU FDL is a way for authors to conditionally give up some of the rights they have under copyright. It is not a claim to be able to impose additional restrictions above and beyond what copyright grants. Since fair use is legitimate in copyrighted works, an author may use fair use. But this doesn't preclude that author from releasing the work under the GNU FDL, because the GNU FDL does not pretend to impose ad"