There is a lot of debate about this, but in the most simplist of terms, if it doesn’t resemble the original, if you honestly can’t recognize it, then it’s a new template. But giving credit for the home team that got you there, that is up to you but seriously, and I mean seriously, encouraged.
Those with good hearts and minds typically say something like “based upon Kubrick” with a link. Those without…..who cares about them anyway. They’re trash bloggers! 😉
If you’ve just changed the fonts, widened or narrowed it, and gave it new colors and a header, it’s still Kubrick. If you took away the wasted real estate on the side borders, put the sidebar on the other side, put the footer on top and the header on the bottom….you know where I’m going…then it’s yours.
What Manji did, and what I really like, is to recognise other designs based on Manji as flavours. I think this is something that perhaps could be used as a method to provide credit for the original author in addition to crediting the new design to the current user. I’ve seen designs that have ripped to shreds the original Kubrick and turned the whole thing upside down, and yet these people still give credit where credit is due.
I like your design and I think it’s obvious to those that have seen kubrick to know it’ kubrick, but it’s distinctive enough to call your own. There’s plenty of space in the CSS to add as many credits as you want. You can right a book if you want.
You could have, for example:
CafeGeek Theme by: Your name
Author URI: Your domain
Description: blah blah
Below it you can add:
Based on Michael H…. Kubrick Theme
Theme URI: http:///bl;ah blah
Author: Blah
Descriptionm: blah.
Really you only need to place your work part in the CSS with no need to modify the Kubrick element. Addtionally a link back is always welcome and appreciated.
As for when is a theme you’ve modified your own, well, I asked that very same question – the theme I did was uite different to the original, and almost unreocgnisable I guess, at the same time, I still credited the author, because I didn’t do the theme from scratch. A theme you take and modify is never wholly your own, but the distinction of when it is your own is up for debate and varies from person to person. Use your judgement, be sensible and fair and you won’t go far wrong
Very cool.
Yeah I’m going to create a credit page soon, with credit to the template and also folks on this site who’ve helped me with coding issues.
Cheers
rob
Copyright law requires that a template should be 10% different before you can call it your own. But the WordPress Community would prefer (and will strictly advocate) that the template must at least 50% different before calling it your own. For an example of 50% difference, see Kubrick: http://binarybonsai.com/kubrick
and Mallow (based off of Kubrick): http://www.somefoolwitha.com/mallow/
I think % is taking things a bit far …. and the number of ways you could measure that would mean arguments anyway.
the template must at least 50% different before calling it your own
Are we talking css or code here? The layout I use was originally for drupal, but I converted it to WP. So the css and images are mostly the original authors, but the php is mine.
Where exactly does this ‘legality requires the template be 10% different’ thing come from — and, as podz asks, how on earth would it be measured? It’s straightforward enough to measure whether PHP code is 10% different — just do a diff — but you can make a theme look completely different by changing a lot less code than that. Conversely, you could mess with the xhtml and php but leave the css intact — it’d look the same, but the amount of fiddling with invisible stuff might qualify you to call it a new theme. The GPL model simply doesn’t fit how most people evaluate templates. We don’t look at the source code to judge how derivative a theme is; we look at the output. And I’d be hard put by either standard to call a two-col centred fixed-width theme with a nice header 50% different from the next two-col centred fixed-width theme with a nice header.
Anyway, the fact that the original poster cared enough to ask about this issue means they should be OK.
Where exactly does this ‘legality requires the template be 10% different’ thing come from?
It’s copyright law. I figure that it’s a good standard to live by when making derivatives, but I personally prefer 50% difference. I’ve edited my post for clarity.
the template must at least 50% different before calling it your own
Are we talking css or code here?
According to past debates, the 50% difference has to be visual. Such as the case of Kubrick vs. Mallow, or Kubrick vs. Wuhan.
When crediting others, I like the 50% difference.
When people credit me, I’d be happy with the 10% difference.
[rant]
…changing colors and border-style is not a friggin’ 10% difference…
[/rant]
% …
49% / 51% ?
How to measure ? By who ? Looking at the main page / comments / archives / single post ? And who stops the author doing what they want anyway ? (No-one can)
That’s the problem. I don’t see how you can possibly measure something as subjective as ‘does this site look like this site?’ in percentages. Most of us can spot a ripoff and pinpoint what’s been lifted from the other design, but I don’t know how you’d begin to classify that in numerical terms (or why that would be useful).
It is very good of the original poster to even bother to ask. Generally left to their own devices WP users are more than generous in this respect. There are different shades of credit. Someone may not (in your opinion) merit a link on the front but you could put them in the CSS comments or on a credits page on the blog. No one is going to criticise much anyway. Do your own thing. Good luck and welcome to WordPress.
Since Kubrick is released under the GPL, why not just follow its guidelines:
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
>>>
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
I wonder how many theme developers are actually bothering to annotate every template they edit with the date and details of their modifications. So many of the supposedly GPL ones don’t even bother to state the licence (is that legal?)
