[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

[Chip Bennett]

Let me ask it another way: Make the Plugin free, strip out the subscription
payment, but leave the site usage restriction in place. Would the Plugin be
accepted in the Plugin directory?

That is: the Plugin has an "API" (really just a phone-home script to verify
license tier) that cripples existing functionality if the Plugin is used on
more sites than allowed under the license. Would such a Plugin be accepted
in the Plugin directory?

Why or why not?

Because as I understand it, that functionality would be construed as a
usage restriction that is incompatible with GPL - and as such, the Plugin
would not be accepted.


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Bryan Hadaway <bhadaway at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Basically PageLines is "saying" that DMS Pro is GPL in order to
> > get DMS into the free repo, but then really applying their own
> proprietary
> > license to it which directly contradicts the GPL rendering it not
> actually
> > GPL. If you paint a door black and tell people it's white, it's still
> black.
> > This is an abuse of everything the GPL and WP stands for. How could this
> not
> > be clear?
>
> That is not clear because it is in fact utterly false. It's not how
> the GPL works, it's not how licensing works, it's not how copyright
> works, and everything you think you know about this topic is
> completely and totally wrong.
>
> I do not know how to make this any more clear to you. You are
> attempting to apply your knowledge of other things to a subject upon
> which you clearly do not understand in the least respect
>
> You are just wrong. Period. That is the end of the debate as far as I
> am concerned. They do not violate the GPL in any way whatsoever. This
> is not up for debate any further. If my actual logical arguments on
> this matter do not convince you, then you are beyond my ability to
> assist you any further.
>
> This is NOT a matter of GPL. I will not have any further discussions
> on the topic of the GPL in this particular instance, nor will I read
> any further debate in this thread mentioning the GPL on this matter.
>
> TL;DR: We're done as far as "GPL" goes here.
>
> -Otto
> _______________________________________________
> 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/aadfc39f/attachment.html>