[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

Thu Oct 10 00:03:15 UTC 2013

In an ideal world? Yes. The code has been purchased and distributed. It
should work that same way, forever - not be crippled due to failure to
maintain a recurring payment.

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Simon Prosser <pross at pross.org.uk> wrote:

> Well what it means is, if you activate the pro version then add a section
> or something with pro features then decide to stop paying that section
> continues to work just as you set it, you just cant add a new one.
> In your ideal world should the user be able to keep pro options forever?
> Im finding it hard to follow this thread and see what your solution is.
>
>
> On 10 October 2013 00:53, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com> wrote:
>
>> Simon,
>>
>> "Sites are not crippled or destroyed, it isnt a 'kill switch'."
>>
>> You remove the users access to the settings and options which are
>> required for them to maintain their website? Forcing the items they once
>> paid for into a "read-only" mode which can't be modified by the user unless
>> they pay again, correct?
>>
>> That's what I was implying by crippled, not that you were destroying
>> websites. No one has ever argued that, what we're arguing is you limiting
>> the usage of features that users already paid for.
>>
>>    --Trent Lapinski
>> =============
>> CEO of CyberChimps Inc
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2013, at 4:41 PM, Simon Prosser <pross at pross.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Yea i saw the email, mentioning 'features of the software are crippled'
>> if you stop paying. Which isnt true, all settings for sections added
>> continue to work as before. Sites are not crippled or destroyed, it isnt a
>> 'kill switch'.
>>
>> If you bothered to look at the code you'd know that.
>>
>>
>> On 10 October 2013 00:35, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Simon,
>>>
>>> I think it is also appropriate to mention that you are a PageLines
>>> developer, and likely helped develop these usage limitations in the paid
>>> version of your theme. So perhaps you can clearly define how your usage
>>> limitations actually work?
>>>
>>> We're not arguing the GPL compatibility of the free version, we're
>>> discussing the usage limitations present in the paid version.
>>>
>>> According to the WordPress.org guidelines:
>>>
>>> "Commercial versions of free Themes (i.e. “freemium” or “up-sell”
>>> Themes) are required to be released under GPL-compatible licenses"
>>>
>>> It has always been WordPress.org Policy that themes or plugins or their
>>> pro versions that are not 100% GPL compatible are not allowed on
>>> WordPress.org.
>>>
>>> The GNU confirmed that:
>>>
>>> • The GPL applies to both the copyright holder, and users.
>>> • DMS (Paid Version) violates the GPL according to the GNU due to the
>>> usage limitations and restrictions in your pricing structure.
>>> • DMS (Paid Version) thus violates WordPress.org Guidelines and Policy
>>> yet DMS (Free Version) was still approved anyway despite these concerns
>>> being raised multiple times by the community.
>>>
>>> There is currently a disagreement among the admins and their
>>> interpretations of the GPL, which is why we sought clarification from the
>>> GNU.
>>>
>>> The GNU stated that there is no way for them to police who is upholding
>>> the rights of the GPL, but we do have this Theme Review Team, and the
>>> purpose of this Theme Review Team is to enforce GPL, as well as
>>> WordPress.org's policies.
>>>
>>> Regardless of anyones intepreration of the GPL, there is still a valid
>>> WordPress.org policy concern as this is also against the free and open
>>> source philosophies that WordPress.org was founded on:
>>> http://wordpress.org/about/philosophy/
>>>
>>> In other words, the theme never should have been approved until an
>>> actual resolutions was made on this subject.
>>>
>>> As it stands right now the Admins will be discussing this likely outside
>>> the scope of this review mailing list and then make some kind of official
>>> ruling. If they don't, then this will just keep coming up over and over
>>> again until an official determination is made.
>>>
>>> All of this will go away if PageLines stops limiting the rights of
>>> users, especially paying customers.
>>>
>>> --Trent Lapinski
>>> =============
>>> CEO of CyberChimps Inc
>>>
>>> On Oct 9, 2013, at 4:15 PM, Simon Prosser <pross at pross.org.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> > 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>:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > "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 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 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 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 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
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> My Blog: http://pross.org.uk/
>> Plugins : http://pross.org.uk/plugins/
>> Themes: http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/profile/pross
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> My Blog: http://pross.org.uk/
> Plugins : http://pross.org.uk/plugins/
> Themes: http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/profile/pross
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/cc7251ca/attachment-0001.html>