Smilies debate going on

[JohnM]

May the plugin have the option to include user or theme icon sets ? If yes, icons may be designed/changed to fit with theme graphic design.

[chipbennett]

Okay, I'm happy with that. I just posted the info needed to fix core and to make such a plugin, so if the necessary filter gets put in soon, I'll create the plugin and load as many GPL smiley packs I can find into the thing.

Some help finding GPL-compatible smiley packs would be appreciated.

Here's the list of emoticon sets available at KDE's Get Hot New Stuff. You may want to verify, but since they're distributed by KDE, I'm fairly certain that each one will have a GPL2-compatible license.

There are also a whole bunch available at kde-look.org. Enter "emoticon" in the "name contains" search field.

Lots more available via the Google. ("Emoticon" returns better results than "smiley" or "smileys".)

[chipbennett]

More emoticons: _ck_'s bbPress Smilies plugin is CC-GPLed, and links to a couple other emoticon sets.

[Jane]

Just as WordPress is Automattic's product.

I just wanted to point out that WordPress is not Automattic's project. Matt Mullenweg was one of the founders of WordPress, and he also founded Automattic. Two of the four core developers are paid by Automattic to spend significant time working on WordPress. However, Automattic does not own, is not the parent company of, and does not make the decisions for WordPress. As someone who works for Automattic I can confirm that we are very conscious of not crossing that line. Matt, Ryan, Andrew etc make decisions for WordPress in their capacities as project lead and lead developers (respectively) of the open source project, not in their capacities as Automatticians, just as Mark Jaquith and Peter Westwood make decisions for the good of the project as opposed to their day jobs. As you can see on the Automattic home page at http://automattic.com, though there are a lot of project that Automattic *does* own, it specifies that Automattic *contributes to* WordPress.org.

[Dan Schulz]

Hi Jane!

Thanks for the clarification. I tend to speak rather fast and loose at times; the post you quoted the excerpt from was on of them. :)

[Brad]

Jane,

For clarification, are all of the following true?

1. Matt Mullenweg is the founder of WordPress
2. Matt Mullenweg owns WordPress

3. Matt Mullenweg is the founder of Automattic
4. Matt Mullenweg owns (at least partially) Automattic

5. Matt Mullenweg is the top decision maker for WordPress
6. Matt Mullenweg is the top decision maker for Automattic

Some of the statements might be obvious but knowing for sure might help clear things up.

Edit: Ok, reading your comments again I see some answers but still have questions on the others:

1. Yes - "Matt Mullenweg was one of the founders of WordPress"
(Who are the other founders?)

2. Not Sure - Is it Matt Mullenweg. Is it a non profit group?
(I have always wondered who actually owns the WordPress project)

3. Yes - "he also founded Automattic"

4. Not Sure - I assume Matt Mullenweg is at least a partial owner of Automattic.
(If there are other owners, can they be divulged?)

5. Not Sure - I am guessing Matt Mullenweg has final say in most important decisions

6. Not Sure - I am guessing Matt Mullenweg has final say in most important decisions




Thank you

[dancole]

Matt Mullenweg owns WordPress

WordPress is a fork of B2. There is no copyright notice within the WordPress software, only a notice saying it's licensed under the GPL. From my understanding, WordPress is owned by all code contributors. Meaning, for example, if every single contributor, without exception, wanted to move away from the GPL or dual license, then another project with a different license could be created using the same code. But at the same time, the GPL license is going to protect every user of the software, so... owning it isn't going to make it "my way or the highway" or anything.

[chipbennett]

WordPress is a fork of B2. There is no copyright notice within the WordPress software, only a notice saying it's licensed under the GPL. From my understanding, WordPress is owned by all code contributors. Meaning, for example, if every single contributor, without exception, wanted to move away from the GPL or dual license, then another project with a different license could be created using the same code. But at the same time, the GPL license is going to protect every user of the software, so... owning it isn't going to make it "my way or the highway" or anything.

Ownership isn't really the issue; rather, control/decision-making authority is the issue.

I believe that's the point Brad is trying to elucidate. With respect to control/decision-making authority, there is no meaningful separation between WordPress, Matt Mullenweg, and Automattic.

[Brad]

I'm looking for simple straight forward answers to my questions hopefully from someone like Matt or Jane. I don't mean to hijack the thread but since Jane was clarifying, I hoped she would expand a bit.

@Chip - Man, I had to look up elucidate :)

[Brad]

@dancole - I'm not up on copyright and how it may affect overall ownership however I did notice that Automattic is the owner of the WordPress trademark.

That trademark is registered under multiple goods and services and its first description seems to cover wordpress.org and the second description, wordpress.com

"IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Downloadable software program for use in design and managing content on a website."

"IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Software solutions, namely providing use of on-line non-downloadable software for use in enabling internet publishing."

So I think it might be fair to say that Automattic owns the trademark for wordpress.org not Matt