[theme-reviewers] GPL and limiting usage

[Srikanth Koneru]

Actually disabling stuff is what got everyone's goat :)
Some say its not gpl, is it really not gpl? only a lawyer can tell, kick
this issue to a WP foundation lawyer and let them decide.
if it is gpl then all's well and we all will start selling subscriptions
happily.


On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Ünsal Korkmaz <unsalkorkmaz at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > And yes, we cant use this theme/plugin/whatever in multisite if not
> > developer licensed: http://www.pagelines.com/pricing/
>
> Okay, so let's just boil this objection down here, to the root of the
> problem.
>
> From looking through the latest theme code, it appears that they've
> moved all the paid functionality out into something called
> "DMSPluginPro".
>
> So, my first view here is that we have a free theme with support for a
> paid plugin. Not that unusual. I've seen special support for, say,
> GravityForms before.
>
> Now, that paid plugin comes from them as part of a subscription
> service. They offer different models for different levels of users. On
> the whole, this is not particularly objectionable either. Users with
> more websites will need more support. Multisite is more complex.
> Things like that.
>
> The plugin also checks that the subscription is an active one. It's
> tied to the subscription via code. Note that it doesn't necessarily
> need to be tied to said subscription, but it is, in the plugin code.
> The idea being that it's a perk with the subscription system. This
> last bit is the big objection some people are disliking. And honestly,
> GPL doesn't enter into it. Whether the plugin is GPL or not doesn't
> really matter here.
>
> The big question is this: Should we reject a theme because the theme
> author also sells an add-on plugin for it that has a monthly fee
> attached to it?
>
> Even if you want to yell "GPL" from the heavens, that's just an
> excuse, in my view. Are we really going to add this tight of a
> restriction on every subscription system made by every theme author?
> That seems like insanity to me. They want to sell an ongoing service.
> Presumably they provide support with this service. Presumably they
> have forums and other things to justify this service. The pro-code
> editor thing doesn't strike as something worth $8 a month,
> realistically, so I'm guessing that really they're selling their
> support here.
>
> As we all know, the selling support model is the only one that works
> for theme shops in the long run. You cannot provide
> free-lifetime-support. That would be silly. So a subscription system
> is perfectly justifiable in-and-of itself.
>
> If selling support services on a monthly basis was all it was, would
> we even be having this debate on the list? Now, suddenly, they throw
> in a plugin with some deactivation code in it and everybody loses
> their shit?
>
> The plugin doesn't bother me. The subscription doesn't bother me.
> They're selling support like every other theme shop out there. Simple
> as that.
>
> -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/20130921/6f222264/attachment-0001.html>