[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

Fri Sep 20 19:36:38 UTC 2013

I think the problem for some of us, and what was confusing me, was the 
assertion that the removed code violated GPL rather than simply 
violating WPORG requirements. If that were the case then simply porting 
to a plugin would not be good enough, because it was still a GPL issue.

But the actual case is that the code *only* violated WPORG, not GPL 
requirements.

I think, too, that sometimes I fail to recognize that WPORG requirements 
go further than GPL requirements.

> Emil Uzelac <mailto:emil at uzelac.me>
> Friday, September 20, 2013 14:00
> The issue is no longer an issue. It was taken care by PageLines.
> Codes are removed and I believe that we mentioned this few times
> already. Currently Theme in question does not have any GPL issues.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> Trent Lapinski <mailto:trent at cyberchimps.com>
> Friday, September 20, 2013 13:55
> I've just been watching this so far, and I have to admit I'm getting 
> confused as well.
>
> Are subscription based themes and plugins that limit usage if the user 
> stops paying allowed on .org?
>
> If no, then the theme shouldn't be allowed on .org until they change 
> their pricing model.
>
> If yes, can someone please explain how this is GPL compatible?
>
> This answer will have a drastic effect on all upsell themes and 
> pricing models for theme shops. We need a clear yes or no answer with 
> a defined explanation.
>
> This isn't an us vs. them situation. This is simply a "is this 
> allowed?" and so far not a single admin or .org representative seems 
> to have an answer.
>
> Can we please get a clarification so we can put this issue to rest 
> once and for all?
>
> --Trent Lapinski
> CEO of CyberChimps
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Sep 20, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Bryan Hadaway <bhadaway at gmail.com 
> <mailto:bhadaway at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> *@Otto*
>>
>> Just because you disagree with me does not make the issues I'm 
>> raising a rant and it's not fair for you to be dismissive in that 
>> manner. Also, I'm not concerned that this discussion is being 
>> ignored. I wasn't even the one who started this discussion so clearly 
>> others have the same concerns. Furthermore, are you even reading my 
>> responses? They're very concise and backed up with facts, links, 
>> quotes etc.
>>
>> The GPL is not just about code and never has been, that's only part 
>> of it. I think it more importantly has to do with usage rights and 
>> specifically to the point, our roles of protecting the users of this 
>> community, hence additional WP policies and guidelines.
>>
>> No, I haven't reviewed the new ticket theme code nor will I nor 
>> should I, as I don't need to, that's completely irrelevant. The only 
>> proof needed is right here:
>>
>> http://www.pagelines.com/pricing/
>>
>> You already made your point that "Well, marketing language is one 
>> thing and the fine print is another..." (paraphrasing of course) and 
>> I already agreed that is a good point generally, but doesn't apply 
>> here as the theme developer has already clarified that it's not a 
>> support limit, but a usage one.
>>
>> I couldn't be more calm, clear and concise in my communications. 
>> Nothing I've said has been frantic or hyperbole in the least.
>>
>> You say that I need to be more clear and backup what I'm saying, well 
>> if you disagree with me, I invite you to do the same. If you disagree 
>> with me, here's what you're saying:
>>
>> *1. Under the GPL, we're allowed to sell themes, but restrict how 
>> many websites our customers are allowed to use those themes on.*
>>
>> *2. Under WP policy, if we submit plugins or themes, we're not 
>> required to keep all our WordPress works GPL compatible.*
>>
>> Is that what you're saying? And if not, I'm completely failing to 
>> understand what you mean. Instead of just disagreeing with me, do you 
>> have a rebuttal?
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org 
>> <mailto: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
> Bryan Hadaway <mailto:bhadaway at gmail.com>
> Friday, September 20, 2013 13:08
> *@Otto*
>
> Just because you disagree with me does not make the issues I'm raising 
> a rant and it's not fair for you to be dismissive in that manner. 
> Also, I'm not concerned that this discussion is being ignored. I 
> wasn't even the one who started this discussion so clearly others have 
> the same concerns. Furthermore, are you even reading my responses? 
> They're very concise and backed up with facts, links, quotes etc.
>
> The GPL is not just about code and never has been, that's only part of 
> it. I think it more importantly has to do with usage rights and 
> specifically to the point, our roles of protecting the users of this 
> community, hence additional WP policies and guidelines.
>
> No, I haven't reviewed the new ticket theme code nor will I nor should 
> I, as I don't need to, that's completely irrelevant. The only proof 
> needed is right here:
>
> http://www.pagelines.com/pricing/
>
> You already made your point that "Well, marketing language is one 
> thing and the fine print is another..." (paraphrasing of course) and I 
> already agreed that is a good point generally, but doesn't apply here 
> as the theme developer has already clarified that it's not a support 
> limit, but a usage one.
>
> I couldn't be more calm, clear and concise in my communications. 
> Nothing I've said has been frantic or hyperbole in the least.
>
> You say that I need to be more clear and backup what I'm saying, well 
> if you disagree with me, I invite you to do the same. If you disagree 
> with me, here's what you're saying:
>
> *1. Under the GPL, we're allowed to sell themes, but restrict how many 
> websites our customers are allowed to use those themes on.*
>
> *2. Under WP policy, if we submit plugins or themes, we're not 
> required to keep all our WordPress works GPL compatible.*
>
> Is that what you're saying? And if not, I'm completely failing to 
> understand what you mean. Instead of just disagreeing with me, do you 
> have a rebuttal?
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> Otto <mailto:otto at ottodestruct.com>
> Friday, September 20, 2013 12:07
>
> BTW, what you are referring to here (the "pro" code) was in the
> first version they submitted. Are you saying that this same code
> exists in the second version, the one you actually wrote about in
> ticket?
>
> Because if so, fine. But I was under the impression that they had
> already addressed that and moved the "pro" code into a separate plugin
> which they are selling separately. If true, this means two things:
> a) They fixed the problem well before your decision to criticize them
> for it, and
> b) You never even looked at the new version of the theme before
> posting in the ticket about it.
>
> Please correct me if I'm incorrect. What exactly about the theme
> currently is in violation of the rules? Facts, not rhetoric.
>
> -Otto
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> Bryan Hadaway <mailto:bhadaway at gmail.com>
> Friday, September 20, 2013 08:55
> *@Emil* - So, you tell us we cannot discuss here in-list and should 
> post in-ticket:
>
> "This discussion is inappropriate for this list. As noted few times 
> here if you have any questions please add them to the ticket directly, 
> not here."
>
> So, we do that and then you tell us it's inappropriate to do that? 
> Then you create unnecessary rhetoric about this being simply an issue 
> of CyberChimps Vs PageLines. And because of this, you're just going to 
> ignore all legitimate issues raised by "competitors". Any of us at all 
> that develop themes, which is most of us, are technically competitors.
>
> And besides all that, you're the one who alerted me to the original 
> DMS ticket in the first place!
>
> *@Admins* - I have never in my life wished so much that I didn't work 
> for CyberChimps (because I love working there), just because this is 
> going to be used to discredit anything that's said. This ticket 
> (https://themes.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/14369) is spiraling out of 
> control fast because of unnecessary rhetoric created on all sides. Can 
> we please get you to step in and forget who said what and simply look 
> at all the facts?
>
> *@Community/Theme Developers* - You guys are the ones that raised this 
> discussion in the first place, don't let this be cheapened into some 
> sort of unfounded petty attack by CyberChimps and let that be used as 
> some sort of catalyst for special treatment or exceptions to allow a 
> theme that none of us could get approved, approved. You guys can see 
> all the issues here just fine without my help.
>
> This is not and never will be just some personal issue, this effects 
> us all. If we allow a free theme to be accepted who's pro theme abuses 
> and takes advantage of users in the form of restricting usage based on 
> how much they pay and also forces them to continue paying indefinitely 
> or their theme will be handicapped creates a precedent that we're all 
> allowed to do that.
>
> Even if some loophole in the GPL has been found, while I don't think 
> so because this so obviously and blatantly goes against everything the 
> GPL stands for, this is still wrong!
>
> It's so incredibly absurd that I have to try so hard to do the right 
> thing when that's the entire point of this review process, to protect 
> users from these kinds of things.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130920/11041226/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: postbox-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1409 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130920/11041226/attachment-0004.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: postbox-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1336 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130920/11041226/attachment-0005.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: postbox-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1250 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130920/11041226/attachment-0006.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: postbox-contact.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1391 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20130920/11041226/attachment-0007.jpg>