I don't get why writers try to abuse copyright law to artificially constrain the disbursement of their material. I know anything I've written (fantastic internet rants for the most part, but also code) I'd try to get out to as many people as possible. Emailing everyone a copy of my book would not take more than seconds effort, yet publishers treat it as a limiting factor, when distribution just isn't.

Instead, I'd attach a donation link, except rather than say "please give me $$ for beer" I'd say "please give me $$ so I can write my next book rather than sweep floors". Charge for the expense, and with the exception of an initial ice breaker to get visibility, you have access to the same potential capital, except more, because it is a variable rate. You could see your big fans throwing thousands at you a piece. Even with a 1% conversion rate, having 1000x the audience because your material is free and open would mean more long term sustainability.

I'm not saying don't pay for the dead tree that cost 50c to chop and 30c to print on, that has a marginal cost per unit. But when you are passing around digital material all the time, it is absurd to be trying to bill per unit like its scarce.