[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

Thu Oct 10 00:16:25 UTC 2013

We'll let you know.

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Daniel <danielx386 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok I'm really lost here, are those themes going to be removed or not?
> Regards,
> Daniel Fenn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
> > 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
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20131009/18d0ec29/attachment-0001.html>