WordPress › Support » Theme Licenses

Forums

WordPress › Support » Themes and Templates

Theme Licenses (22 posts)

podz
Support Maven
Posted 3 years ago #

As a non-designer, excuse my ignorance.

Attribution and 'tagging' of work are important to graphic artists.

I have just downloaded some theme's / layouts from the list in this forum. None of them indicated which - if any - licence they were being released under, or even if they were fully copyrighted and I was unable to alter anything whatsoever.

This post isn't about starting arguments, more about saving them.

Should we ask that all layouts / themes and styles are explicitly put under some sort of license by their author ? And that all the appropriate documentation is included in the download ?
Is this something that would be good ? As it stands, it looks a bit of a mishmash.....
XeroCool
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

imo, I think It would be the authors decision. The themes have copyrights on them so I know their all copyrighted. Arzel has a copyright on all his/her themes and I respect that. We could get a license for all WP themes but I think the credits is good also (Not that I remove it or anything). Just my opinion..:).

-XC
BuffyVS
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

What I think is that if you are using someone elses work then of course you should have some kind of credit given to them, even if you have altered something of theirs. However, if you are the one who has created the design from scratch then its up to the designer if that person wants to be given credit- most of the time you do anyway-

Its so hard to tell who has created what theme here and if it is orginal or not. I have already noticed a few threads stating that some of the works shown here are in fact basic complete copies of various other sites- which is fine, but it should be at least stated as such- do not pass your work off as an original if in fact it is not. Just because a work is not labled as copyrighted doesnt mean that it is not. There are already a numerous of people here who have spent time created layouts in which they have stated they do not mind if you alter, but I am sure they would still appreciate credit of some kind.
macmanx
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

Short and simple, I believe all themes should list the Theme Name, Author, License, and URL (commented of course) in the index.php.
NuclearMoose
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

The GPL under which WordPress is released is a stated and known fact. IMO, WordPress should only list those themes and plugins and hacks that have a definite licence of some kind attached to them. It shouldn't matter what that licence is, rather it matters only that when folks go to use those third-party products, they know what they are getting.

If it is found that someone releases something without the appropriate permission or using the appropriate follow-up licence, then that product will be labelled as something to stay away from, and any and all requests for support with those products would be banned/removed from the support forums.

Just my opinions. It's not my decision to make.
Anonymous
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

Shouldn't support for individual themes be handled by the author of that theme anyway, rather than the Wordpress support forum? If we're going to support themes here, won't we have to do the same for plugins?

If there is going to be a list of officially-sanctioned Wordpress themes - and again, to be consistent, wouldn't you have to do the same for plugins? - by all means specify that authors must affix a license. But if not, I don't see that third-party efforts and any arguments they might provoke are WP's problem.
NuclearMoose
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

@Anon,

I agree totally that support requests should be handled by the author of the theme, hack, or plugin. The problem, however, is when people continue to use unsupported products, they come here looking for support. I'd rather support that than dozens and dozens of problems people are having with a beta release.

It would have to be consistent across all WP-sanctioned products. That is why I specifically listed themes, hacks, and plugins.

As for your last comment, I agree as well. But that said, you and I both know that a small number of people will always make an issue where they wish to, and can easily make a mess of support forums with their diatribe.

Ultimately the decision to "officially sanction" anything has to be with the lead developers and those that they choose to consult with. We may never see "WP-Approved" anywhere. Hard to say.
jonimueller
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

Bloggers seem to be ceaseless tweakers and tinkerers by nature. It is to be expected that if they use a theme or skin on their site, they'll eventually fiddle with it. Sometimes to the point where it bears little or no resemblance to its original state.

While you should be free to change a stylesheet or edit a graphic used for your own site, it's the **redistribution** of this now (somewhat) changed work that gets people into trouble.

And there are those on the Net who feel that as long as it's available for download, it's theirs to use, change and redistribute (sometimes without any indication of its origin, or more questionably, leaving everyone to believe it is their original work).

Maybe I'm reading more into Moose's query than I should.

This should prove to be an interesting thread, tho. I'd like to see what others have to say about this.

It should be in the FAQs somewhere that the first line of defense in a misbehaving plugin, skin or theme is that plugin's, theme's or skin's author. But because this forum has set a dangerous precedent of being helpful, everyone naturally runs here first! (Not that there's anything wrong with that!)
NuclearMoose
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

Joni,
"Maybe I'm reading more into Moose's query than I should."

Not sure what you mean. I guess you aren't sure what I meant, either! :)

I totally agree that changing and redistributing stuff can be a touchy subject. That's principally why I think that any author should provide a link to the licence they wish to associate with their product. If you have a licence, then you have some kind of backup for a claim that person A misused your work. Besides, I think that the bloggers will, for the most part, hold people accountable for the work that they post and claim as their own.

Most everyone will allow a consumer to tweak the code or the CSS, it's just when it's rebundled and posted for mass consumption that the trouble can start. Proper use of licences should help people guide themselves as to what they can and cannot do with the products they customize.
Yngwin
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

I also agree that a policy needs to be formulated. I understand that a wp-themes site will be set up, complementing dev.wp-plugins.org. I guess that the same license requirement will exist: that themes published there will have to be GPL-licensed, or have a GPL-compatible license.

There will also need to be some control, because it could easily turn into a mess when people use copyrighted designs or artwork in a theme. (As already is the case with certain themes announced on these forums...)
Anonymous
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

I guess that the same license requirement will exist: that themes published there will have to be GPL-licensed, or have a GPL-compatible license.

Certainly that's the requirement for stylesheets submitted to the repository on Alex King's site. Alex King also mentioned in comments on Binary Bonsai that, because themes are dependent on a WP installation, they may 'catch' the GPL from it, again in much the same way as plugins do.

Under the GPL, the author doesn't have to be credited on the site and any user can redistribute the theme, altered or unaltered, as much as they like. That's going to deter some people from developing themes. So the question is not 'do we force all theme developers to release their work under a license?' but 'do theme developers actually have a choice about whether or not to release their work under the GPL?'
NuclearMoose
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

We don't force anybody to do anything. We simply state that IF you wish to have a WP-sanctioned product, it must be release under some kind of licence so that anyone wishing to create derivative works knows where they stand in terms of the original.
tomhanna
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

"It should be in the FAQs somewhere that the first line of defense in a misbehaving plugin, skin or theme is that plugin's, theme's or skin's author. But because this forum has set a dangerous precedent of being helpful, everyone naturally runs here first! (Not that there's anything wrong with that!)"

A lot of those author's (most of them? all of them?) participate here. This is a good central place for them to answer the questions so the next person who has the same problem has a good central place to look for an answer. Seems a lot of people get their nose out of joint that people are asking inappropriate questions any time it's a question they can't personally answer. The better way to look at it is that any question one person is asking, there are probably 10 other people looking for the answer and not saying a word.

But that's all totally off-topic for the subject and I apologize in advance.
Anonymous
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

We simply state that IF you wish to have a WP-sanctioned product, it must be release under some kind of licence

And my question is; because of the license WP itself is released under, must that license be a GPL one? I know this is pretty arcane but at least one of the WP developers has expressed the opinion that it must, and it would be good to hear some input from people who know about licensing issues.
NuclearMoose
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

Anonymous,
Try reading the thread completely and quit picking out issues which are not there. This is only a theoretical discussion anyway, as I stated near the beginning. I specifically said my remarks are my opinion and that it is not my decision to make.

The issue is simple: If a WP-related product is released, I feel that it should be required to be release under a licence; any licence, so that anyone wishing to create derivative works from that product know the limitations and restrictions, if any.

I am not in a position to make this decision. I am in a position, like any WP community member, to offer an opinion on whether or not this should be done, and if it is done, in what way.
somefool
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

As an author of a theme, I realise that theres not alot that can be done once someone gets hold of it on their site.

However if the inference is that some maybe included in the default WP download then I would suggest that the author ensures theres atleast a link back to their site in the style.css and a note on the footer or something simply commented out with a note to please not remove this line.

This is what Im trying to do and after the suggestion from someone I (should have but discovered I havent :-S ) included a GNU license with mine (ill rectify that now ;-) ).

The thing is, Im none to clear as to what the license effectivly means. Im happy for it to be tweaked to hell and redistributed but Id just like to retain at minimum a commented link back to me in the footer or style.css file.
NuclearMoose
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

It's up to authors to become familiar with the various licenses out there and how best to use them.
somefool
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

true, however imo

Should we ask that all layouts / themes and styles are explicitly put under some sort of license by their author ? And that all the appropriate documentation is included in the download ?

i would say if you do that itd be good to have a short paragraph explaining the options and recommending a license. Just something simple.

I had a look on the various GNU and CC license sites and found it quite confusing. Like is there a reason why I should choose GNU over CC? Ive included a GNU license but because Im so unsure Im almost tempted to remove it and just put an explanatory paragraph myself.

Of course this all reliant on people ACTUALLY reading it (the licenses or readmes that is).
ryan
WordPress Dev
Posted 3 years ago #

If you distribute a plugin, it must have a GPL compatible license. CC is not a source code license and is not appropriate for plugins.

Themes are another matter. There is an informally acknowledged loophole (similar to the arrangement with Linux kernel drivers) whereby theme templates are not considered combined works of WP even though they call into WP API. Of course, informally acknowledged doesn't have much legal standing. CSS doesn't call into WP at all, so it won't be considered a combined work.

The GPL only kicks in if you distribute your changes. If you keep your plugins and themes to yourself, you are not obligated to show your source.

So, if you distribute a plugin, it needs to be GPL compatible. If you distribute a theme that is wholly your own, you can give it whatever license you want. For best legal safety, however, make the templates GPL compatible. The CSS can be left as proprietary.

Making the license under which you release your plugin or theme clear is a good thing. In the US and other countries, copyright is automatic. If you don't see specific license information, assuming "all rights reserved" is safest since you don't know the author's intentions.

The only thing officially sanctioned by WP (whoever that is) is the WP distribution itself, the whole of which is released under the GPL. Anything hosted at wp-plugins.org must be GPL compatible.

Read the GPL FAQ.

Standard disclaimer: IANAL nor do I play one on TV.
Anonymous
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

OK, let me see if I've got this right: any code that includes WP functions should be GPL'd but you can choose your own license for the CSS. Thanks rboren for clearing that up.

In practice, I think very few people will bother having separate licenses for theme components, and will therefore release the whole theme under the GPL or a compatible license. And designers who, for one reason or another, find the terms of the GPL unacceptable can continue to provide stylesheets for existing GPL templates under a license of their choice.

somefool: there is nothing in the GPL to stop you crediting yourself in the template, however the GPL does allow people to remove it if they don't want it to be visible. They are not allowed to remove your copyright declaration in the source code. So people can redistribute it, but they can't pass it off as their own work.
sadish
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

How and where do we have to apply for these licenses...

how much time it takes ?
macmanx
Member
Posted 3 years ago #

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html