[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

Wed Oct 9 23:15:54 UTC 2013

The WordPress.org version of this theme is not restricted and does not
expire.

On 10 October 2013 00:12, Justin Tadlock <justin at justintadlock.com> wrote:

>  This code that the users can not copy, distribute, or modify is given to
> users?  It has been distributed to them?  Does Pagelines' terms restrict
> the further copying, modifying, or distribution of this code?
>
> I don't care what happens with your Web site when you "use" (i.e., run)
> the code (in terms of GPL).  I'm strictly asking about the actual code,
> which is what is licensed under the GPL.
>
>
> On 10/9/2013 6:05 PM, Trent Lapinski wrote:
>
>  Are users restricted from copying, distributing, or modifying the code?
>
>
>  Yes. PageLines uses a proprietary usage limiting API that prevents users
> from copying, distributing and modifying their paid features which are
> entirely software based (not a service).
>
>  The usage limitations are only lifted if the user pays $24 a month for
> unlimited usage rights, and if you stop paying all of your websites lose
> functionality no matter how long or how much you've already paid into the
> system.
>
>  You can't actually buy the features, only "rent" them.
>
>     --Trent Lapinski
> =============
> CEO of CyberChimps Inc
>
>
>  On Oct 9, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Justin Tadlock <justin at justintadlock.com>
> wrote:
>
>  I'd like to point, once again, to something I've already said on this
> matter.
>
> From the actual GPL license <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html><http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html>
> :
>
> > "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
> covered by this License; they are outside its scope."
>
> Are users restricted from copying, distributing, or modifying the code?
> **Any** activity beyond that has nothing to do with the GPL.  If we want to
> continue talking about the GPL, fine.  But, please answer this question
> first.
>
> If we want to discuss our policy on themes like this, that would be a much
> more fruitful discussion, one in which I think many of us would be more
> likely to agree on.
>
> On 10/9/2013 5:49 PM, Trent Lapinski wrote:
>
> If the Theme Review Team and .org Admins are confused by PageLines
> marketing then what do you think the average customer thinks when they find
> out they're stuck?
>
>  People won't realize what PageLines "service" actually means until
> PageLines flips the kill switch and they lose access to features they
> already paid for and can no longer update the website they've built.
>
>  Your understanding of the GPL was correct according to the GNU.
>
>  I do not believe Otto and Nacin were incorrect in their logic or
> reasoning, I think they simply didn't understand the full application and
> deceptive nature of what PageLines is actually doing until now.
>
>  We got clarification from the GNU on this issue so we could bring about
> a resolution and properly educate everyone on what applies here in this
> particular case and for future similar cases.
>
>  As far as I'm aware we've never seen anyone try to do this before, it's
> a very clever strategy to lock users in that looks like a support service
> at first glance but its much more then that.
>
>  It's a usage limitation that contradicts users rights as outlined in the
> GPL, and is also clearly against WordPress.org <http://wordpress.org/>policy.
>
>  There is nothing wrong with software as a service if you are actually
> providing a service. What PageLines is claiming is their software is the
> service, which is simply not true. It's a marketing ploy that even a lot of
> people here fell for which further illustrates the deceptive nature of what
> they're trying to accomplish.
>
>     --Trent Lapinski
> =============
> CEO of CyberChimps Inc
>
>  On Oct 9, 2013, at 3:20 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>    It is not against GPL, GPL gives you legal permission to copy,
> distribute and/or modify the software.
>  You can do all that with their plugin. (atleast pagelines say you can
> edit out the restrictions)
>
>  Its not already paid for, plugin is not just $8.
>
>  I always thought this wasn't allowed as per WPORG policy, but Otto/Nacin
> says it is so it is. Maybe their higher up's may overrule them and until
> they do its allowed under WPORG policy.
>
>  Its not morally/ethically wrong because they are putting the pricing plan
> upfront, users are buying knowing that they have to pay a monthly fee.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com>wrote:
>
>>  Selling people a WordPress theme is selling them a tool to build a
>> website with.
>>
>>  How would you feel if you went to Home Depot and were told you can't
>> buy the hammer you need to build a bird house, you instead have to join
>> Home Depots "subscription" to get access to the hammer you need to build a
>> bird house, but you're only allowed to build 1 bird house with that hammer.
>> If you want to build more then 1 bird house you have to pay signficnatly
>> more money monthly to do so.
>>
>>  If you finishing building your bird house and stop paying they will
>> take your hammer away, and also lock you out of features from the birdhouse
>> you already built and paid for.
>>
>>  That's what PageLines is doing, and thats why this is against the GPL,
>> WordPress.org <http://wordpress.org/> Policy, and morally and ethically
>> wrong.
>>
>>  This has nothing to do with upgrade fees, support, or anything else.
>> That has to do with limiting and crippling software that customers have
>> already paid for and forcing them to continue to pay for something or else
>> they lose access to the tools they need to maintain or update their website
>> in the future.
>>
>>  This is not a support service, but merely a clever way to lock users in
>> forever.
>>
>>        --Trent Lapinski
>> =============
>> CEO of CyberChimps Inc
>>
>>   On Oct 9, 2013, at 3:00 PM, Bryan Hadaway <bhadaway at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>   Whatever the case, I feel we're actually getting much closer to all
>> being at least in the same book, maybe not quite the same page yet. But,
>> much closer to a reasonable and productive understanding/conclusion.
>>   _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>  _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 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
>
>

-- 
My Blog: http://pross.org.uk/
Plugins : http://pross.org.uk/plugins/
Themes: http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/profile/pross
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20131010/22d19701/attachment-0001.html>