[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

[Chip Bennett]

This statement is pretty clear:

Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
covered by this License; they are outside its scope. *The act of running
the Program is not restricted...*


So, usage is not implicit, it is explicit.


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I thought that way too, but after reading gpl a few times, i did not see
> it talking about usage.
> So basically we are assuming usage rights?
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>
>> Google?
>>
>> (Seriously. Not only is it a basic operating principle of Theme Reviews -
>> developers can't add clauses that restrict usage - but it's also just plain
>> common sense. How could a license grant the right to copy, modify, and
>> distribute a work, but not grant the right to *use* that same work?)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Chip, anywhere i can read up on "Restricting use is just as much of an
>>> incompatibility with GPL as would be restricting copying, modifying, or
>>> distributing." ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI, Akismet was asked and answered in one of the previous 94 emails in
>>>> this thread. But to reiterate:
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Akismet provides a server, that performs a service. That service is
>>>> evaluation of content to determine if that content is spam. The algorithms
>>>> used to evaluate that content reside on Akismet's servers. The API allows
>>>> the client (Plugin) to interact with the server, to send content to be
>>>> evaluated, and then returns the evaluation.
>>>>
>>>> There is absolutely no issue with this whatsoever.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Daniel <danielx386 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know that this is more of a plugin question, but would Akismet fall
>>>>> under the same matter as far as GPL is concern? Or am I missing
>>>>> something?
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Daniel Fenn
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > Seriously! Unless someone can answer Justin's question what's the
>>>>> debate
>>>>> > about? As far as I can tell I can download Pagelines, remove the DRM
>>>>> and
>>>>> > redistribute it without violating their terms. Sounds GNUy to me.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > (and yes I know that when it comes to DRMs there are issues related
>>>>> to the
>>>>> > DMCA, but for that point to be relevant we would have to require
>>>>> GPL3, not
>>>>> > GPL2, which we don't.)
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Justin Tadlock <
>>>>> justin at justintadlock.com>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Sorry, I haven't seen the evidence of this before.  That's all new
>>>>> to me.
>>>>> >> There's been a lot of posts.  It should be easy to understand that
>>>>> maybe
>>>>> >> I've missed something through all of the discussion.  Can you (or
>>>>> anyone)
>>>>> >> please share where, in their terms or wherever, this information is
>>>>> coming
>>>>> >> from (the information where you're not allowed to copy, modify, or
>>>>> >> distribute the code)?
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I don't need anything more than that.  I don't even care that much
>>>>> about
>>>>> >> this discussion.  I'm just interested in seeing the answer to my
>>>>> question.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thanks
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On 10/9/2013 6:25 PM, Bryan Hadaway wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> @Justin
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> "If they limit how you can use the code that has been distributed
>>>>> to you,
>>>>> >> that'd be a problem."
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> That's what they're doing. What is a theme, a theme is code, they're
>>>>> >> saying you can only use this code x amount of times for x amount of
>>>>> dollars.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> That's from the horses mouth, what more do you need? I'm happy
>>>>> you're
>>>>> >> trying to understand, but this has all been covered over and over.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>> >> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131009/91625313/attachment.html>