I *do* agree that all license terms should be explicit. The user should, with minimum effort, be able to find the exact terms under which bundled resources in a Theme are released. However, I don't really see a benefit in trying to maintain a "whitelist" of known GPL-compatible licenses on the Theme Review Codex page.<div>
<br></div><div>It is imperative that we ensure end-user rights, but I see diminishing returns to such efforts. It is the license terms, rather than the names, that are important. As long as the reviewer - and ergo, the end user - can readily find the terms under which the work is released, we fully ensure that end-user rights are maintained.</div>
<div><br></div><div>For the case of the IconDock icons in question, I see no problem with quoting the license terms in readme.txt, along with a reference URL.</div><div><br></div><div>That said: there is certainly no harm in *asking* a designer to release a work under a "known" license. I just don't think we should arbitrarily limit/hinder Theme developers (and by extension end users) because an iconset designer chooses to use his own ad-hoc license terms - as long as those ad-hoc license terms are GPL-compatible, of course.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Chip<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Kirk Wight <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kwight@kwight.ca" target="_blank">kwight@kwight.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I have to disagree. Heck, I'll even call this a "slippery slope".<div><br></div><div>I would love to see all assets, scripts etc not created by the submitter to be explicitly released under a GPL-compatible license listed on the Theme Review Codex page. In turn, that license must be stated in readme.txt, and any submitter should be able to provide a link to that license upon reviewer request. If a submitter feels a license should be included on the approved list, a reviewer can evaluate and make a recommendation.</div>
<div><br></div><div>It's very common to have these situations of "oh, they said we can use it for whatever", in which a license may or may not have even been explicitly declared, and it becomes the reviewer's duty to try and track down a license and/or make an interpretation of whatever comes up. It becomes a drain on reviewer resources, instead of a proper responsibility of the submitter to meet requirements.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The <a href="http://wordpress.org" target="_blank">wordpress.org</a> repository is for GPL-compatible themes, and anyone downloading these themes should be confident that that's what they are getting. If someone insists on using assets that are vaguely licensed, or fall under the "sure, yeah, whatever" umbrella, they are free to release that theme however they choose, somewhere else.</div>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<div><br></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 17 May 2012 11:42, Chip Bennett <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chip@chipbennett.net" target="_blank">chip@chipbennett.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Here is the exact wording of the license, from that link:<div><br></div><div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><h4 style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;padding-top:10px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:3px;padding-left:0px;font-family:'Lucida Grande',Arial,sans-serif;font-size:16px;line-height:20px;color:rgb(51,51,51);background-color:rgb(241,240,240)">
License Info</h4><p style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:1.5em;padding-left:0px;color:rgb(85,85,85);font-family:'Lucida Grande',Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;line-height:18px;background-color:rgb(241,240,240)">
Free to use for whatever purposes. If you use these icons, an optional link to<a href="http://icondock.com/" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;color:rgb(0,114,188);text-decoration:none;outline-style:none;outline-width:initial;outline-color:initial" target="_blank">http://icondock.com</a> would be appreciated. Thank you.</p>
</div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>This doesn't <b>explicitly </b>state the the work is released under a GPL-compatible license terms, but "whatever purposes" does implicitly include use, modification, and redistribution.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I would be in favor of considering these as "GPL-compatible".</div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div></font></span><div><span><font color="#888888">Chip</font></span><div>
<div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Doug Stewart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:zamoose@gmail.com" target="_blank">zamoose@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Chip:<br>
He linked it up-thread.<br>
<a href="http://icondock.com/free/vector-social-media-icons" target="_blank">http://icondock.com/free/vector-social-media-icons</a><br>
<div><div><br>
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Chip Bennett <<a href="mailto:chip@chipbennett.net" target="_blank">chip@chipbennett.net</a>> wrote:<br>
> Bruce,<br>
><br>
> Can you link to the actual license wording/text?<br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
><br>
> Chip<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Bruce Wampler <<a href="mailto:weavertheme@gmail.com" target="_blank">weavertheme@gmail.com</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> For what it worth, the people at IconDock sent this reply to a query about<br>
>> possibly putting a more explicit license on their social icon set:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi Bruce,<br>
>><br>
>> It means 100% free for any purpose. You may distribute or resell them as<br>
>> you like.<br>
>><br>
>> Nick<br>
>><br>
>> I personally think the license on the site also makes this clear, and that<br>
>> it meets all the intent of GPL.<br>
>><br>
>> I realize that doesn't make it GPL-Compatible for the repository, but it<br>
>> does, to me, make it a safe set to use. Perhaps it could be provided via a<br>
>> user initiated upload or non-repository hosted plugin. It really is nice<br>
>> looking, and complete, and provides what is clearly a legal to use<br>
>> alternative.<br>
>><br>
>> Since there seems to be such a demand for a nice set, perhaps there could<br>
>> be a special ruling made for this particular set to allow it into the<br>
>> repository?<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Otto <<a href="mailto:otto@ottodestruct.com" target="_blank">otto@ottodestruct.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Syahir Hakim <<a href="mailto:khairulsyahir@gmail.com" target="_blank">khairulsyahir@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> wrote:<br>
>>> > OK, so the bottom line is can we bundle these icon sets without any<br>
>>> > pre-made<br>
>>> > licences, but with the express intent that they're free for any use,<br>
>>> > with<br>
>>> > WP.org repository-hosted themes?<br>
>>><br>
>>> If you don't *know* that it is GPL-Compatible, then you cannot use it<br>
>>> in any code on WordPress.org, period.<br>
>>><br>
>>> -Otto<br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org" target="_blank">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org" target="_blank">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org" target="_blank">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><span><font color="#888888">--<br>
-Doug<br>
</font></span><div><div>_______________________________________________<br>
theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org" target="_blank">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org" target="_blank">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>