Interesting comment from Matt on paid stuff

[Jeffro]

In a nutshell, I think this plays a large role into the amount of problems with the folks trying to make money around WordPress with themes or plugins. Those unwritten rules. How many times must this specific scenario be played out until the problem is addressed. I also like chips idea of separating ethics/morals Free software stuff from the GPL and provide a page for both on WordPress.org. Oh yeah, writing down the unwritten rules 'if there are any' would be good too.

Developer looks at WordPress, sees it is licensed under GPL - which is very explicit and common license. He decides to provide some nice services, fully complying to GPL.

Suddenly there is crowd of people shouting that he is a dick.

Developer thought WordPress is project with clear license, turns out there is load of unwritten rules and he is a dick - unless he obeys those as well as GPL.

[Otto]

Developer looks at WordPress, sees it is licensed under GPL - which is very explicit and common license. He decides to provide some nice services, fully complying to GPL.

Suddenly there is crowd of people shouting that he is a dick.

What services are they providing? As far as I know, they're selling plugins and themes. I have no problem with people selling services. I gather that they have a fairly good support forum as well, which I do not object to.

I have problems with them developing their own WordPress-based code, claiming it's GPL, and still charging for it instead of giving it back to the community.

Developer thought WordPress is project with clear license, turns out there is load of unwritten rules and he is a dick - unless he obeys those as well as GPL.

This is confusing. If you read all the rules but don't understand situation until someone calls you dick, then you were either uninformed, misinformed or lied to. So which case is WP?

There's no fixed set of unwritten rules. But you can still be a dick by, well, acting in dickish ways. This is not new.

If you honestly thought that it was okay to build a business around a piece of free software and do absolutely nothing to contribute back to that set of people using that free software, but only thought to make money off that crowd of people who need your help... then you are a dick.

I mean, if somebody gives you something, and you take it, and don't at least *try* to give something back in return, then guess what: you're probably a dick. Sounds like a Jeff Foxworthy routine...

If people who adhere to all rules end up being dicks...

If you honestly believe that life is a simple matter of just adhering to "the rules", then we really have nothing to discuss, because you're probably a dick. Some things you do because you have a sense of right and wrong.

[chipbennett]

I don't see why that's confusing. They're legal, but IMO, still wrong.

Look at it this way: I don't like what they do and the way they do things, even though I admit they're fully within their rights to do it.

Is that less confusing?

Your opinion is, of course, yours. The question is: what gives you (or, more importantly, Matt) the right to impose your opinion on the community as a whole?

No, they're part of their own separate, hidden behind a paywall, community.

I bet Automattic counts all those WordPressMU users, who are also wpmu.org subscribers, in their aggregate stitistics for numbers of downloads/users/installs/etc.

So, how are they not part of the WordPressMU community?

Or, are they, too, ostracized because they choose to use a behind-paywall service, rather than toe the Richard Stallman-esque line about free software?

In other words, that separate community is basically a leech. They take the free stuff the WordPress community as a whole gives away. They add their stuff onto it, then hide it away, giving nothing back to anybody that isn't paying for it. They take everything while giving nothing.

They give plenty. Obviously. Otherwise, people wouldn't pay them for what they give them.

You just don't like it, because they don't give (what you deem worthy) to you.

Of course, that stance is the height of hypocrisy. Didn't you state in another thread that you deem releasing a derivative work under GPL to be sufficient, appropriate compensation? In your own words:

GPLing the derived work is the compensation. It's the only compensation I require. And guess what, since I determine what is valuable to me, hahah I just got compensated!

So, which is it: appropriate compensation, or not?

You don't get to have it both ways.

And again, they're within their rights to do so. Doesn't mean we have to like it.


It's harmful to everyone because it's not helpful to everyone. By not contributing anything back to the wider community, they're hoarding to themselves. They're preventing progress that could be acheived faster if they contributed.

Amazingly, stupidly wrong logic. Again: obviously, what wpmu.org provides is helpful to some - and in fact, is helpful to enough to make their business model profitable.

Unless you once again exclude from the "community" all of those WordPressMU users who pay for wpmu.org subscriptions?

Example: Let's say they develop a solution to a widespread problem and make people pay for it.

This scenario is the breeding ground for every known business enterprise that has ever existed: someone develops a solution to a problem. And then (the audacity!) they make people pay for that solution.

Eventually, somebody has to create another solution for those people who don't pay for it. This is duplication of effort, and takes extra time.

And that is how the free market introduces competition. Competition is, by definition, the duplication of time and effort. It is also the primary source of innovation and improved quality and efficiency. Competition is a good thing.

It is also irrelevant here, because anyone could subscribe to wpmu.org, and re-release their code.

Yes. Seriously. Leeches suck blood from their hosts too. But if the host wasn't there, the leech would die.

Again with the slurs. They don't "suck the blood out of" WordPressMU. They cost WordPressMU absolutely zero: zero time, zero money, zero resources.

Yes. I see this sort of behavior as profiteering. I contribute my code for free. Why can't they?

Why should they be beholden to your choices? What hubris. Who cares what you do with your code? It is none of your business what they do with theirs (provided that they release it under GPL).

This attitude is why so many people see the Stallman acolytes as nothing more than a bunch of communists. You have no right to dictate to wpmu.org what their business model is or should be.

Also, they don't give their code away for free, because it is their means of existence. No paywall, no wpmu.org. No wpmu.org, no wpmu.org code. No wpmu.org code, then you have a whole bunch of less-satisfied WordPressMU users - who are, except for when you capriciously exclude them, members of the WordPressMU community.

And again, I agree that I cannot force them to contribute. Doesn't mean I like it.


And WordPress itself is the absolute *core* of their entire business. Without WordPress, they wouldn't exist. See the problem here with your reasoning?

Nope, no problem whatsoever - because WordPress is released under GPL, which means that anyone can use it, modify it, re-release it, and charge for their distributed work. They are doing what Matt and Automattic explicitly authorized them to do.

See the problem here with your reasoning?

Matt's core product and business is WordPress.com, and all of the major enhancements they've put into that exist as plugins, for free, for anybody to use. Automattic does indeed make money from WordPress. But they contribute back to it too.

There's nothing inherently wrong with making money. There is something wrong with taking other people's work and making money off of it without giving anything back in exchange. That's called "being a dick".

And more slurs. You just can't help yourself, can you?

How can one be acting like a "dick" when they are doing what you explicitly authorized them to do.

How are you not "being a dick" by trying to impose on them restrictions that go beyond the license under which you released your code?

How is adding a "contribute back to WordPress" clause any different, fundamentally, from added a "single-site" restriction to a theme?

Why do you get to add extra-GPL restrictions, and not commercial theme developers? Why are not both extra-GPL restrictions equally wrong?

I believe their behavior is unethical, yes. Illegal, no.


Nonsense. I'm free to hold any opinions I like. My opinion is meaningless, it's only my opinion. There is absolutely no ethical consideration involved in stating my opinions.

And what of the ethical consideration involved in you (or Matt) imposing your opinion on everyone else?

They help themselves.[/QUOTE]

And they help everyone who pays for their subscription. Obviously. Otherwise, they wouldn't stay subscribed.

Because they're not part of our community, they're part of *their* community, the ones paying for the products. I am not and cannot be part of their community because I will not pay for these products. I cannot help them with their problems, because they're running code that is hidden to me. I cannot use solutions they have, because they won't give them to me. And on and on, by joining that paying community, they automatically exclude themselves from the rest of us, because we can't see what they do. It's an inherent separation of communities.

They (the WordPressMU users who pay for wpmu.org subscriptions) are not separating themselves from the greater WordPressMU community; you (and others), by fiat, are separating them from yourselves. It is not inherent; it is intentional, and unidirectional.

The argument is not "spiritual", it is "ethical".

Then quit calling it "spiritual" (i.e. the "spirit" of the GPL).

I love how you continue to use victim language here.. "Shunning" and such. Makes me LOL.

I'm not "shunning" anybody.

Except, you just described how you are, in fact, shunning wpmu.org and the WordPressMU users who pay for wpmu.org subscriptions.

I'm saying it flat out, plain and clear: They're being dicks. If I met them, I'd tell it straight to their face: "Stop being such a dick."

And you're being hypocritical. Again, I'll quote you:

GPLing the derived work is the compensation. It's the only compensation I require. And guess what, since I determine what is valuable to me, hahah I just got compensated!

You claim that releasing a distributed work under GPL is the only "compensation" you require, yet when wpmu.org does exactly that, you call them "leeches" and accuse them of "being dicks".

I call that being a hypocrite.

Brother, that's not "shunning".

Also note that this has zero to do with Automattic. If they created something and kept it only on wp.com, I'd bitch at them too. Have done it before, in fact. In every case where they've made something cool, plugins have been created (or core mods made) to give this functionality back to the community as well. Code exists, right now, for free, to make an exact copy of WordPress.com, more or less.

Including the CSS editor?

It would seem that Automattic has hidden their WordPressMU CSS editor behind (gasp!) a paywall, and has yet to release it back to the community.

[Jeffro]

Including the CSS editor?

It would seem that Automattic has hidden their WordPressMU CSS editor behind (gasp!) a paywall, and has yet to release it back to the community.

I spoke to Matt about that, even mentioned it in the interview and he said it was just lower on the list of priorities. Whether you want to believe that is up to you.

[chipbennett]

Why in the heck do you think he needs any sort of "right" to do that?

I can admonish or ostracize anybody for any reason I like, any time I like. I need absolutely no "right" to do so. It's called "freedom", brother.


... neither of which I'm interested in. I know the argument as well as you do and it's played out. I stand by my opinion in this matter.


What gives you the right to tell developers what they "should" and "should not" do?

See, that knife cuts both ways.

I always reserve the right to complain, about anything and everything, as loudly as I want to. And if you don't like it, well, feel free to complain back.


Nonsense. If WordPress was not available to them, they couldn't be making a profit with their code. The fact is that they are making a profit off the work of others. And that's not illegal, mind you. WordPress is free as in speech. So they're in the clear.


It is my considered opinion that much of the community that exists has been pulled into their community instead, drawing resources away from the MU community as a whole.


Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries.


Yeah, woo! Feel free to flip others the finger and take their free work and use it for yourselves! Woo! Selfish bastards, go!


Multi-DB vs. HyperDB.


No. I won't. What are you going to do about it? Nothing? Thought not.

I will continue to state my opinion, repeatedly. And if you keep arguing with me, then I'll only state it more loudly. Because, and this is important, it's my opinion. If you disagree, that's fine, but don't stand there and try to tell me what it is that I think. Simply disagree and move on. Arguing just makes it more public, more loud, more annoying. And I can continue to argue and disagree all day, if that's what you want.


I disagree. And I will continue to disagree, vocally. If you don't like that, too bad.

If your entire argument from this point onward is going to be "it's my opinion, so I don't have to explain or defend it", then there really is nothing to discuss.

Frankly, I'm not interested in your opinion. I am interested in what is right and what is wrong.

It is one of the last vestiges of a losing argument to appeal continually to one's opinion.

I'm not discussing my opinion. Can we perhaps leave yours out of the discussion, as well?

The GPL isn't a matter of opinion, nor are the implications of licensing something under GPL.

[Rarst]

I have problems with them developing their own WordPress-based code, claiming it's GPL, and still charging for it instead of giving it back to the community.

Why use word claiming? It IS completely GPL code. GPL does NOT define giving back as requirement. GPL is absolutely fine with selling derived code.

You have problem with people doing things that WordPress explicitly allowed and encouraged to do by using GPL license.

If you honestly thought that it was okay to build a business around a piece of free software and do absolutely nothing to contribute back to that set of people using that free software, but only thought to make money off that crowd of people who need your help... then you are a dick.

I think that I dislike being lied to. And company that provides GPL product but treats me like dirt for using it like GPL product is full of.

If you honestly believe that life is a simple matter of adhering to the rules which are written-down only, then we really have nothing to discuss, because you're probably a dick.

I believe that providing people with one set of rules and judging them by another is a scam.

I believe that releasing project under GPL and talking about freedom, while trash talking people who try to make use of that freedom is hypocrisy.

[chipbennett]

I spoke to Matt about that, even mentioned it in the interview and he said it was just lower on the list of priorities. Whether you want to believe that is up to you.

Yep, I heard that.

So, could the wpmu.org folks not likewise use a similar argument: well, we've just got other, new things that are higher priority...

More fundamentally, why is it acceptable for Automattic - for whatever reason - to keep their WordPress-derivative CSS editor behind a paywall, yet it is unacceptable - for whatever reason - for the wpmu.org folks to keep their code behind a paywall?

I really don't have a dog in this hunt; I'm just tired of seeing illogical and hypocritical arguments - on both sides. I think the on-going nonsense is and will be detrimental to the WordPress community.

[Otto]

Too long. I'm picking and choosing.

Your opinion is, of course, yours. The question is: what gives you (or, more importantly, Matt) the right to impose your opinion on the community as a whole?

Where is any opinion being imposed, exactly? All I've seen is people asking nicely for people to comply and getting rebuffed. Has Matt taken somebody to court?

So, how are they not part of the WordPressMU community?

Are these people contributing in the public WordPress forums? Are they publishing articles on the subject? Are they contributing code back to the project?

Being in a community has nothing to do with merely downloading and running a piece of software.

Of course, that stance is the height of hypocrisy. Didn't you state in another thread that you deem releasing a derivative work under GPL to be sufficient, appropriate compensation?

Indeed, it is sufficient compensation. I think I stated that they were totally in the clear. However, I also believe I stated that it's when they're releasing it back to everybody that I considered myself compensated. I don't consider GPL-but-not-available-without-paying-hundreds-of-dollars to exactly be the same thing.

You don't get to have it both ways.

Screw that. I go to Burger King, and have it my way.

This scenario is the breeding ground for every known business enterprise that has ever existed: someone develops a solution to a problem. And then (the audacity!) they make people pay for that solution.

And you know what, yes, they should not do that. Not when they are benefiting from the free work of others. That's not "audacity". That's "being a dick".

Competition is a good thing.

When resources are unlimited (or very large), yes. Resources are usually not unlimited.

It is also irrelevant here, because anyone could subscribe to wpmu.org, and re-release their code.

If the set of people paying for their solution is so large, where is this code re-released at? Has nobody done it? Perhaps they're afraid that they'd lose their subscription?

The subscription model is a darned good workaround for this sort of thing. Several groups have used this method to subvert the intent of the GPL in the past, with much success.

You have no right to dictate

Please point out exactly where I "dictated" one god-damned thing. And then, when you can't do so, please stop putting words into my mouth.

I have said several times that they're perfectly within their rights, so just stop with your bullshit of responding to things I did not say.

I will not bother responding to you any further if you're only going to mischaracterize everything I say in your own way.

Fin.

[Jeffro]

Ok, that about does it. If you two want to continue, feel free to fill up your private message box.