AFAIK breaching the terms of use for a license is against the law in almost all countries. Or have I misunderstood something here?

But wasn't that a plugin which was not GPL itself? I'm not sure there is any policy about linking to non-GPL sites from plugin owners sites yet.

Personal blog | Twitter
Menu plugin | CSS Generator | Premium Support | New plugin: Code Comments

That's probably because the plugin author's site usually isn't linked to from every page of the site on which it's installed. A theme on the other hand, usually has the link in the footer, where it will always show up (unless the site owner removes it of course).

Will Anderson
It's an Anderson | Twitter | Anderson Web Solutions

Okay, I told myself a long time ago I wasn't going to participate in these GPL discussions, but what the heck, I'll throw in my two cents.

First question doesn't really apply to me, since I am a themer. But even if I wasn't, I'm not someone who would get mad over something as silly as a non-GPL WordPress theme.

Disadvantages? Let's see...they could be closed source (encrypted), or worse - they could cost money. But GPL themes could cost money too, so maybe that one doesn't count.

Advantages? A lot of great themes aren't GPL. Take a look at WooThemes, for example. Sure, they cost money, but you'll be hardpressed to find a free GPL theme with similar design and functionality as a WooTheme.

Opportunities? Well, they can host their themes on the highly coveted WordPress.org theme directory, whereas evil non-GPL themers can't.

Theme Lab | Twitter | Personal Blog

Question. If I release a GPL licensed theme that uses a method to restrict your access to the style sheet, am I in violation of the spirit of the GPL?

I don't get it. How would you (and why would you) restrict access to the stylesheet?

Personal blog | Twitter
Menu plugin | CSS Generator | Premium Support | New plugin: Code Comments

@antoniowells - If you haven't already done so, it may be a good idea to forward your blog post to the WordPress.org contact email address (I'm assuming there is one). Clearly they've goofed up here and I'm sure they'll be keen to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Personal blog | Twitter
Menu plugin | CSS Generator | Premium Support | New plugin: Code Comments

The GPL for which WordPress is filed under states that in order to be compliant, you can not impose any restrictions. So restrictions of any kind would automatically violate the GPL license.

In the end, if you read his post a few times, it looks like Antonio was in the wrong and then in the right but in the end, he was still denied the chance to have the theme hosted on the repository because the reviewer believed Antonio's sole purpose was to promote AndroidTapp.

WPTavern Twitter Account | Personal Blog | WordPress Weekly Podcast

So here's where I am right now:

1) WP.org is within its rights to restrict the theme directory to GPL themes. I'm cool with that.

2) WP.org is absolutely off its rocker in trying to enforce a no-linking-to-sites-that-promote-non-GPL-themes policy - only exceeded (slightly) by the inane argument of putting such a policy in place in order to prevent "crappy" themes that promote non-GPL themes. (If a theme is crappy, deny it on its merits.)

The two-degrees-of-separation dictate has no support in the GPL, and is completely arbitrary (and even punitive). If the GPL doesn't restrict end use of GPL code, then why on earth does WP.org (i.e. Matt) think that they have the right to dictate to GPL authors what they can say (or support) on their web sites?

3) WP.org (and Matt specifically) is doing the WP community a disservice by taking an all-or-nothing approach with GPL applicability to themes.

4) Now, as for Antonio's situation: the theme he submitted was GPL, and the author website contained no non-GPL themes. That his theme didn't get included demonstrates a clear problem with both the system and the policy.

And, most importantly:

5) If the WP community doesn't get a say in the matter, then can WP.org <em>really</em> claim that it is a <em>community</em> project?

6) I would respectfully suggest that Matt M. take his SABDFL queues from Mark Shuttleworth.

Consider a somewhat recent GPL "issue" in the Ubuntu community, when Mozilla tried to force Linux distros to display an EULA upon first run of Firefox. Shuttleworth made a decision that was initially rather unpopular; however, he took great pains to explain his decision rationally, in great detail, time and again (I'm too tired to go find the LaunchPad bug link ATM).

Anyone with a modicum of vision can see that this issue is only going to get bigger, and left un-addressed will only result in polarization of the WP community.

I'm honestly not trying to bag on Matt. I just think that his handling of this issue thus far will not benefit the WP community in the long term.

@chip_bennett | chipbennett.net (est. 2000) | WordPress user since May, 2005 | Linux (Kubuntu) user since September, 2007
cbnet Plugins

Ah, but there (partly) is the problem: themes are not <em>entirely</em> derivative works of WordPress, and therefore are not <em>entirely</em> subject to the terms of the GPL. That WP (i.e. Matt) fails to recognize this differentiation is creating a problem that doesn't need to exist.

Like I said previously, I'm cool with that. If they only want to let wholly GPL themes into the theme directory, that is entirely their right.

Reading the email exchange on the original blog post, I have to say that I think that the moderator handled the situation entirely wrongly. That said, I do have a problem with the policy itself:

Why? Why, other than Matt's fiat, should WP.org be able to dictate to a theme developer what that developer can or cannot support?

For WP to say, "sorry, you can't have this fully GPL theme in the theme directory, because you also offer non-GPL themes on your web site, which is linked in the GPL theme" is asinine on its own.

But to say, "sorry, you can't have this fully GPL theme in the theme directory, because it links to your site (from which only other GPL themes are available), but your site <em>links</em> to sites that offer non-GPL themes" is beyond the pale.

This policy is asinine.

The GPL is ostensibly about freedom. Why is it that its proponents act in such a way that is so counter to freedom? (GPL: Freedom for me, but not for thee.)

@chip_bennett | chipbennett.net (est. 2000) | WordPress user since May, 2005 | Linux (Kubuntu) user since September, 2007
cbnet Plugins

Could you then explain why I cannot access the style sheet of my WordPress.com blog without paying a fee? Its using a GPL theme and I am restricted from accessing its style sheet and saving my changes.