When a GPL theme is not a GPL theme
01:38 Saturday 23 Dec 06
I was asked to find a 3-col theme for someone today so off I went to the WP forums to find one.
Some clicking later and I find a potential candidate:
It is released under GPL. [1]
I go to the website and see:
License
Anaconda comes with GPL (GNU Public License). Both Mollio & K2 are released under GPL. The only thing we require is that you keep the attributions and linkbacks in the footer without any change.
Now I know the person who wants this theme does not want any backlinks but it’s no sweat to edit the footer.
I download the theme, and open the footer. There is no credit in the footer. So I go looking and find that the theme includes a ‘functions.php’ file - and at the bottom of that file are a few lines that hook into the ‘wp_footer’. It’s GPL - I can rip that out and be perfectly within my right to do so.
I check the CSS:
License: Released Under the “GNU Creative Commons License”,
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/
Yep, there it is again. GPL. So why make it so damn difficult to remove a footer link - after all, most users won’t go near code like that. I go back to the site and find a post titled ‘How to remove attribution link / link back from anaconda theme for wordpress’ and in that the author says:
Anaconda Theme requires an attribution link at the bottom of each page.
You can’t do that. It’s GPL.
However you may not want to have this attribution link / link back in every page of your blog for some reason. Here is what you can do to remove the linkback / attribution legitimately and feeling good about it.
To remove the linkback / attribution from the theme we require that you purchase your attribution free copy of Anaconda for 30$ (per blog),
Pretending you are being generous with the GPL just to then con people out of $30 is way off line.
Needless to say. the add_action line at the bottom of the functions.php file will be deleted ;)
1
that’s so wierd. i didn’t realize anaconda was k2 based, which makes the whole thing even more odd. (given the kubrick guy’s fabled bitching about people removing the link in kubrick).
sometimes i think the GPL is an incredibly faulty license. given that he’s well within his rights to charge the $30 for the theme, but not to suggest that you can’t remove the link.
19:47 Saturday 23 Dec 06
2
That’s why I’m designing my new theme from the ground-up; when I release it, if I find someone ripping it off I can require payment. But, there’s nothing wrong with making the link hard to remove in GPL code.
20:20 Saturday 23 Dec 06
3
Elliot - no there isn’t, but doing so in order to ask for cash IS.
20:38 Saturday 23 Dec 06
4
In cases like this I’m never quite sure whether the designer is honestly ignorant of the terms of the GPL, or whether they’re merely taking advantage of the average user’s ignorance.
Either way, it’s a fairly pointless exercise. People who are inclined to credit you will leave the link in anyway, and those who aren’t couldn’t care less what licence you’re using; they’ll rip the link out anyway. The sort of people who are going to remove the attribution when you specifically asked for it to be retained are not going to pay you $30 for something they can do themselves for free. It just doesn’t work like that.
Personally I feel that if end users can’t accept the designer’s terms of use, it’s up to them to find another theme or make their own. They might be legally entitled to do what they want with it, but what’s legal and what’s moral are not necessarily the same. If I don’t like the terms on which I’m being offered something I’ll go elsewhere, rather than be indebted to someone I think is trying to con me ;)
22:58 Sunday 24 Dec 06
5
[...] primer caso lo và por primera vez en What makes you happy?, y es quizás el más polémico de [...]
14:09 Tuesday 6 Feb 07
6
Sorry, you do not have sufficient privileges to view this post….
……
16:00 Thursday 22 Feb 07
7
[...] other news, after the last bit of ads-in-themes arm-waving, and free beer pointy-headedness, a solution from scott’s themes occured to [...]
20:16 Wednesday 4 Apr 07
8
[...] about doing the right thing, and then immediately do the wrong thing themselves by saying ‘requires an attribution link‘. Yeah.. do the right thing for you, and screw everyone [...]
22:49 Friday 21 Dec 07