[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

[Chip Bennett]

Josh,

Am I missing something? The Theme you linked is distributed under the
Envato Regular License, not the 100% GPL license.

It also includes this statement:

Moreover PurePress is 100% GPL so you are free to use it on as many sites
as you like!


If I had to guess (because I'm really not highly involved with
ThemeForest): that pre-dates the existence of the 100% GPL license. The
developer was (at the time) forced to distribute under the Envato Regular
License, but wanted to distribute under GPL - and so, added statements to
the effect of a "poor man's dual license".


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com> wrote:

> @chip-
>
> We allow developers who sell through Themeforest into the theme repo if
> they meet the "100% GPL" standard on Themeforest right?
>
> First GPL licensed WordPress theme I could find on themeforest:
>
> http://themeforest.net/item/purepress-responsive-retina-ready-portfolio/4720197?WT.ac=search_item&WT.seg_1=search_item&WT.z_author=Dream-Theme
>
> Terms- "Use, by you or one client, in a single end product which end users
> are not charged for"  "This item is licensed 100% GPL." We've agreed that
> Themeforest's authors who choose their GPL license option can be listed in
> the theme repo. How is this different? The themeforest page says I can only
> use it on one site. If you read the details link on that page it says "You
> can’t Sell the End Product, except to one client."
>
> What's different between that restriction, which I would never agree to,
> and the restrictions on Pagelines, which I also think suck and would never
> agree to?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Justin Tadlock <justin at justintadlock.com>wrote:
>
>>  I'm not sure why you've been so confrontational with me.  I don't care
>> to argue about the license.  I wanted something clarified because I kept
>> getting a bunch of op-ed pieces in my inbox.  I simply wanted a factual
>> answer to a single question that I raised.  This question has nothing to do
>> with an opinion either way on the matter.
>>
>> If you want my personal opinion on what I can see from their site, I'm
>> not a fan of what they're doing.  I don't think it's a site that should be
>> promoted on WordPress.org.
>>
>>
>> On 10/9/2013 7:32 PM, Bryan Hadaway wrote:
>>
>>   *@Whoever doesn't like my answers...*
>>
>> I've answered Justin a couple times now, I'm sorry if you don't like the
>> answer or are trying to manipulate the conversation to get the answer you
>> want to hear, but I'm not sure what more you want.
>>
>>  Take the time to read through the entire conversation starting here:
>>
>>
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/2013-September/thread.html#15341
>>
>>  And then followed up in this email discussion and make your own informed
>> opinion on the entire issue.
>>
>>  Yeah, it sucks, it's a lot of reading. But, if you don't like my
>> summations of the issues covered, sorry, I can't do it for you.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing listtheme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.orghttp://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20131009/693eca82/attachment.html>