GPL and Ethics

[Brad]

A Code of Conduct seems like a good idea at first until it begins to trample on the license itself. Wouldn't people then debate whether the GPL or Code of Conduct is correct?

For example, how would a Code of Conduct address the PremiumMod situation. Many people think it's unethical but it's apparently well within the rights of the license.

Just playing Devil's advocate here but curious how that would be worded.

[chriswallace]

I don't typically offer my opinion on this issue, mainly because opinions mean very little in these types of discussions. Ethics and semantics aside, I believe licensing WordPress under the GPL guarantees that the product will always be advanced, whether through borrowing, "stealing," donating, creating, discovering, inventing, or piggybacking.

If you don't like the terms of the license, go do something else for a living or ignore it and license your work how you want. Just don't complain or whine about it.

[chipbennett]

A Code of Conduct seems like a good idea at first until it begins to trample on the license itself. Wouldn't people then debate whether the GPL or Code of Conduct is correct?

For example, how would a Code of Conduct address the PremiumMod situation. Many people think it's unethical but it's apparently well within the rights of the license.

Just playing Devil's advocate here but curious how that would be worded.

The way I envision it, with respect to GPL issues, the official stance would be that anyone is free to exercise all the rights expressed by the GPL.

On the other hand, who the community embraces and includes is not in any way dictated by the GPL. So, the Community Code of Conduct could say, essentially, "you're free to exercise all rights expressed in the GPL, but if you do X, or don't do Y, you will not be accepted as part of the community" - where "doing X" might be charging to download a commercial theme or plugin, and "not doing Y" might be putting a subscription paywall around your derivative-work code without contributing any of it back to the community (to use some contemporary examples).

The point would be, the GPL is not used to enforce the community ethic. The GPL is the GPL, and is left alone as the GPL. The community ethos, as espoused in the Code of Conduct, is entirely separate.

Of course, the community needs to be involved in developing the Code of Conduct, but even something drafted by Matt (et al) would be a good start.

[chipbennett]

I don't typically offer my opinion on this issue, mainly because opinions mean very little in these types of discussions. Ethics and semantics aside, I believe licensing WordPress under the GPL guarantees that the product will always be advanced, whether through borrowing, "stealing," donating, creating, discovering, inventing, or piggybacking.

If you don't like the terms of the license, go do something else for a living or ignore it and license your work how you want. Just don't complain or whine about it.

Nobody here is whining or complaining about the GPL, and such whining and complaining really isn't the point of the thread.

The point of the thread is: how does (or even, should) the WordPress community enforce extra-GPL requirements or restrictions on those welcomed/included in the community.

[Brad]

Not to stray off topic too much but I recently came across an older comment on a blog which basically proposed that a theme is licensed according to the license given to it by the author (restrictive or not) and that the end user would need to either follow the license or legally challenge the license in the proper venue. It would be wrong for the user to assume that he is free to do as he pleased. If he did and was proven wrong, he likely would be liable. Isn't the onus on the end user to make a challenge and not the license holder?

Somewhat related - Many of the themes I have seen released lately contain some fairly sophisticated PHP code. I'm no expert but I'm guessing some of that code could be considered non GPL although most people seem to think ALL PHP code in a WP theme is automatically GPL.

Thus, you could say that your theme is released under a "single-site license", but you would have no legal recourse to enforce that restriction.

[Brad]

Life would be boring if you couldn't whine or complain ;-)

If you don't like the terms of the license, go do something else for a living or ignore it and license your work how you want. Just don't complain or whine about it.

[wpmuguru]

If you don't like the terms of the license, go do something else for a living or ignore it and license your work how you want. Just don't complain or whine about it.

That's exactly how I feel as well. I've been a MS certified developer for years. Before switching out into working full time with WP, the GPL one one of the things I had to accept for what it was.

"That's really what I'm getting at: eliminating the confusion and ambiguity, by properly separating the GPL from the community ethos." - Chip

I think it would definitely help people working in the community. A code of ethics would provide guidelines for ethical behaviour without conflicting with the GPL which defines what is legal.

"Just playing Devil's advocate here but curious how that would be worded." - Brad

Fair question - What I really see the GPL as is a licensing method that allows cooperative communities to exist and thrive. But a community won't thrive if everyone takes things to the limit that the GPL allows, it will die due to lack of contribution/cooperation. So, the ethics of GPL communities are that people significantly involved in using the software should foster the community because in the end, it is the community that is providing them with a business/client base.

[Elpie]

The GPL is a copyright license, nothing more, nothing less. In the early days it was appropriate to refer to a "spirit" or "intention" of the GPL because, as a copyright license, its terms conflicted with law in some jurisdictions. The disclaimers, for example, are not applicable world-wide and the concept of fair use is not recognised in some jurisdictions.

Over time, as more people became involved with development under the GPL the term became confused with the philospophy of the Free Software movement. The current debates are a result of confusing this movement, with all its philosophical passion, with the open source methodology for development and the GNU/General Public License which is nothing more than a copyright use statement.

I'm not interested in getting into another GPL debate. The reason I am responding here is that I don't want to see a Code of Conduct within the WordPress "community" that attempts to draw a line in the sand over GPL issues. If people don't understand the GPL by now they have a responsibility to learn - especially if they intend to redistribute any code that derives from code that's licensed under the GPL.

I question that there is even a "WordPress community". Common use of an application does not make a community.

Any code of conduct should describe acceptable personal conduct for interaction with others. The Ubuntu code is a good one. Trying to set limitations on what is acceptable to "the community" is subjective and risks alienating people.

[chipbennett]

Not to stray off topic too much but I recently came across an older comment on a blog which basically proposed that a theme is licensed according to the license given to it by the author (restrictive or not) and that the end user would need to either follow the license or legally challenge the license in the proper venue. It would be wrong for the user to assume that he is free to do as he pleased. If he did and was proven wrong, he likely would be liable. Isn't the onus on the end user to make a challenge and not the license holder?

Well, at least in the US, one is considered innocent until proven guilty. The copyright holder may allege an infringement, but would have bear the burden of proof.

The end user doesn't have to legally challenge anything to use a work. Rather, he just uses the work as he chooses, and it is incumbent upon the copyright holder to challenge that use, if necessary.

Somewhat related - Many of the themes I have seen released lately contain some fairly sophisticated PHP code. I'm no expert but I'm guessing some of that code could be considered non GPL although most people seem to think ALL PHP code in a WP theme is automatically GPL.

Possibly, but there are plenty of other threads here (I know; I've been heavily involved in them :) ) that debate the intricacies of applicability of GPL to themes. I'd really like this particular thread not to devolve into that debate. Let's just assume GPL applicability (to whatever degree), for the purpose of this discussion.

The one exception to that request would be the scenario in which Matt decides to make the "official" position that images and CSS are unencumbered by GPL, but that everything else is - but that the Code of Conduct includes the requirement that community members must release themes entirely as GPL. I think that's certainly germane.

[chipbennett]

The GPL is a copyright license, nothing more, nothing less. In the early days it was appropriate to refer to a "spirit" or "intention" of the GPL because, as a copyright license, its terms conflicted with law in some jurisdictions. The disclaimers, for example, are not applicable world-wide and the concept of fair use is not recognised in some jurisdictions.

Over time, as more people became involved with development under the GPL the term became confused with the philospophy of the Free Software movement. The current debates are a result of confusing this movement, with all its philosophical passion, with the open source methodology for development and the GNU/General Public License which is nothing more than a copyright use statement.

I'm not interested in getting into another GPL debate. The reason I am responding here is that I don't want to see a Code of Conduct within the WordPress "community" that attempts to draw a line in the sand over GPL issues. If people don't understand the GPL by now they have a responsibility to learn - especially if they intend to redistribute any code that derives from code that's licensed under the GPL.

I question that there is even a "WordPress community". Common use of an application does not make a community.

Any code of conduct should describe acceptable personal conduct for interaction with others. The Ubuntu code is a good one. Trying to set limitations on what is acceptable to "the community" is subjective and risks alienating people.

Great stuff, Elpie! Thanks for commenting.

One thing:

The reason I am responding here is that I don't want to see a Code of Conduct within the WordPress "community" that attempts to draw a line in the sand over GPL issues. If people don't understand the GPL by now they have a responsibility to learn - especially if they intend to redistribute any code that derives from code that's licensed under the GPL.

I would agree, except that, as it currently stands, there is a "line in the sand" over GPL issues. The problem is that "line in the sand" is both unilateral (basically, whatever Matt condones) and ambiguous (both because it is nowhere clearly codified, and because it conflates copyright and ethos under the term "spirit of the GPL").

So, if a "line in the sand" is to exist, it should at the very least be unambiguous, objective, and codified.

Personally, I agree with you: such a "line in the sand" is not needed. The needs of the community can be fostered in other ways.

Also:

I question that there is even a "WordPress community". Common use of an application does not make a community.

True, but I think, if you look at the blogosphere activity around WordPress, sites such as WPTavern, the world-wide participation in WordCamps, etc., that a strong argument forms for the existence of a true WordPress community - a community that consists not just of code-contributors, but also third-party theme and plugin developers, contributors to sister projects (WPMU, bbPress, BuddyPress, etc.), and users who are equally passionate about WordPress.