Paying to download GPL themes

[dstrojny]

Many of the big names in the premium theme space have been converting to the GPL license. This is awesome news for everyone!

I was curious what the community here on the tavern thinks about themes that elect the GPL but do not offer the theme to the community as a free download. I have no problems with this approach and it is of course perfectly acceptable and within the terms of the GPL. With that said, it does seem to somewhat clash with the spirit of WordPress. After all, WordPress itself is not a paid download. This raises some interesting questions:

• Would you pay to download WordPress?
• Do you think WordPress would be as successful if it were a paid download?
• Is this approach in line with the spirit of WordPress?
• Would these authors be upset if someone decided to distribute their themes for free through another channel (not under a different name, just a different channel)? If so, should they be?

I should also add I am not saying this is right or wrong. We offer a paid PRO Membership that includes forum support and a child theme with extra features, so it would make little sense for me to pass judgment on this issue. I am really just curious to hear what other people think.

[greenshady]

Would you pay to download WordPress?

I'd be willing to fork over the cash now that I've been using it a few years. Of course, I'd probably just build my own blogging system instead.

But, when I first heard of it? Nope, I wouldn't have paid for WordPress.

Do you think WordPress would be as successful if it were a paid download?

Nope.

Is [selling GPL-licensed themes] in line with the spirit of WordPress?

I'd make an argument that it is.

Would these authors be upset if someone decided to distribute their themes for free through another channel (not under a different name, just a different channel)?

I think this comment on Alex King's post today really sums it up:
http://alexking.org/blog/2009/06/17/...#comment-68969

I'll take the liberty of paraphrasing the two positions I see stated above:

"I built this. I’m giving it to you with these freedoms. Have fun!"
"I built this. I’m giving it to you with these freedoms, but don’t use these freedoms (please)."

[dstrojny]

Excellent points Justin, thanks for the feedback.

Also, great post by Alex King, thanks for pointing it out. Nice to know someone else was thinking about this too. I especially like the conclusion of his post:

I purchased all of the WooThemes and StudioPress themes this morning. Which should I do first, set up free distribution of these GPL themes or start integrating the Carrington CMS theme framework into them?

Obviously made as a jest, but there is some substance/truth hidden in that statement

[dancole]

I would hope that most people understand that theme developers, or anyone that does a task, deserves to be rewarded for their work. Theme developing can be a job, just like nursing or working in a factory, yet people don't cry out when these people ask to be paid.

I think the biggest thing people don't understand about open source is the payment model. Most products, including some open source project, demand that the end user pay for the product. But open source allows for other groups to bare the burden of payment. In the case of the Linux operating system, which can be downloaded for free, big companies (IBM, Red Hat, Novell...) are spending millions of dollars to develop this software. This same model, which is a not-for-profit model, is being used with the WordPress software, in this case Automattic is mainly paying the bill for everyone else. B5Media and generous (as in time) individuals are also picking up the tab.

note: When I say this is a not-for-profit model, I'm talking about the open source project, not the company paying the bill. Also, the bill refers to project expenses, such as paying the developers and organizers.

[dstrojny]

Alex just posted a follow-up to his earlier post:

http://alexking.org/blog/2009/06/17/...and-a-question

Excellent discussion going on here and in the comments of the aforementioned post.

[adii]

I'd just like to say that what we all need to consider here, is the fact that karma (or at least something similar; irrespective of any specific religion or set of beliefs) does exist. The GPL is ultimately just a document that governs certain rights; most of which can be "tweaked" or "ignored" to suit whoever.

That aside, I think that when Matt (who basically coined the phrase) talks about the "Spirit of WordPress", he's not *only* talking about GPL or Open Source. Instead I think that spirit is much more linked to the principle of karma.

For me, Open Source (viewed holistically) is very, very similar to a democracy in the sense that legally there's too many loopholes and grey areas; so the only way to govern that ecosystem is for all the stakeholders to regulate it in a democratic way. And obviously within that ecosystem, every individual inherits the freedom to make his / her own decisions and with that they accept the consequences of their actions (karma).

I'm not one to overly get involved in these discussions, but thought it'd be a good idea just to share my mantra, because this obviously influences the way I contribute (and do business) at WooThemes and it also influenced us going GPL.

So our themes are out there now and people can go wild with this freedom, as they are legally entitled to do so with the GPL. But every set of laws are ultimately flawed and on a daily basis you'll find people abusing legal rules for their own gain. Are they "allowed" to do that? Sure...

But whether they're doing the right thing is a whole different question... :)

(Sorry for the airy-fairy response; I haven't really been taking part in the discussions here, but would love for everyone to engage me on this...)

[Ryan]

I don't get it.

If anyone wants to repost my GPL code elsewhere, go right ahead. I know the GPL sucks as a way to make money directly, so I work around that and monetize non-GPL sides of my business. Automattic does that, I do that, Justin Tadlock does that. If I couldn't do that, I wouldn't bother releasing stuff as GPL. Releasing stuff as GPL and getting ticked off when people post it elsewhere as a free download seems kinda strange to me.

The only thing that would annoy me with posting my stuff for download elsewhere is that I don't necessarily have control over what is in that software since I didn't upload it myself. Dealing with support requests from people downloading old versions would be quite annoying.

[Ryan]

• Would you pay to download WordPress?

No. I'd change to Habari or maybe SilverStripe instead.

• Do you think WordPress would be as successful if it were a paid download?

No, I think it would die a rapid painful death.

EDIT: Actually, it would probably just get forked and take on a new name. I think development would slow down because of it though.

• Is this approach in line with the spirit of WordPress?

Not really. WordPress is available as a free download. It is line with the spirit of the GPL though.

• Would these authors be upset if someone decided to distribute their themes for free through another channel (not under a different name, just a different channel)? If so, should they be?

I don't think they should, but I'm sure they will/would.

[Ryan]

I'd just like to add that I'm far more likely to buy a GPL theme than a non-GPL theme. I've never paid a cent for web based software in my life and I'm hoping to keep it that way, paying for GPL software seems more like a donation. I'm always happy to donate back though and if it means I get something out of it (ie: a convenient downloadable file) then it helps encourage me to cough up some dough.

[greenshady]

@Adii

Not to put you on the spot or anything (okay, maybe just a little), but I'd like to hear your thoughts on this Twitter conversation: :)

http://twitter.com/themescloset/status/2207129625
http://twitter.com/adii/status/2207208283

So our themes are out there now and people can go wild with this freedom, as they are legally entitled to do so with the GPL. But every set of laws are ultimately flawed and on a daily basis you'll find people abusing legal rules for their own gain. Are they "allowed" to do that? Sure...

I completely agree with this. But, I don't think that's what's in question here. We all understand that people take advantage of the GPL for their own gain. Heck, they don't even need the GPL for it.

I think what's ultimately in question is whether everyone's just hopping on the GPL bandwagon because it's currently in vogue. What's in question is whether they're going GPL in spirit and not just in name.