Support » Everything else WordPress » Here we go again

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Mark (podz)

    (@podz)

    Support Maven

    Registrant:
    XOR Development
    Luja Adamica 10
    Beograd 11000
    Yugoslavia

    Thieves.

    I see nothing wrong with that… I mean, wordpress is licensed under GPL. Even crediting the WordPress name is unnecessary (although appreciated). They are just obliged to credit the first author name on it. Plus, they already credited WordPress in that by naming that phpWordPress.

    “Everyone who posted in this thread is an idiot.”– 0zzie123

    ozzie123 is not 0zzie123 😉 and so one problem is obvious. It’s only one reason Google “frowns” on anyone who would use the name G00gle.

    ozzie123: the problem here is not so much that they’ve apparently put their custom front end on wp, complete with misspellings like ‘menagement’, tragically horrid template markup and extortionary price. It’s that they’re naming their fork WordPress. It’s obviously something that needs to be changed.

    What I wonder is whether their stuff actually works, and if it’s WP at all–the permalinks have an html extension.

    @beel: I really don’t understand your post. And I’ve never said something like that at any post anywhere. But come to think of it… it’s using zero rather than an O…

    Now who’s work is this? Can some one moderate about this? Someone is impersonating me!

    Yes, all this does seem to be about… impersonation!

    ozzie123 – Now do you get my point? 😉

    For those who don’t – ozzie123 never said anything, to my knowledge, remotely similar to what I posted as “zero”zzie123

    OMG… here we go again…

    Ok, I see we still have some unresolved issues, so I’ll try to answer each one respectively.

    @podz: Thieves.

    I’d appreciate if you somehow back-up those words. Otherwise, please restraint yourself from such qualifications.

    @firas: the problem here is not so much that they’ve apparently put their custom front end on wp, complete with misspellings like ‘menagement’, tragically horrid template markup and extortionary price.

    Ouch… those are rather harsh words. BTW, where did you see “menagement”?! I must have missed that… can’t see it anywhere… As for the price – I think it’s quite competitive, having in mind that my script is fully proprietary code, with full support.

    Now, since I really don’t expect anyone to take my word on this, here’s what I’m willing to do.

    I’ll be more than happy to give one FREE license to one of you (personally, I’d like to give it to Firas, since he’s the one who said I “apparently put my front-end on WP”). One and only condition to this is that this person MUST write again here, on this thread, honestly saying if my script is “apparently” front-end, or fully proprietary script that has absolutely every single line of code originally written. Of course, together with apology for the words he said prior to this.

    As for the name issue – if I’m not mistaken, Word Press is not trade mark, right? Otherwise – I invite any person representing WordPress team to contact me with request to rename my product, and I’ll gladly pull my listing from HotScipts, register new domain and move on…

    If you have any more questions regarding my script, I’d be happy to answer.

    Mark (podz)

    (@podz)

    Support Maven

    “phpWordPress”

    You took the capitalisation. And while you are free to do so, I am free to decide how I interpret that. You may think that it is petty – go try and do it to a fully commercial product with an army of lawyers.

    I just think it’s embarrassing that despite being skilled enough to create “fully proprietary code, with full support,” you can’t come up with your own name. That’s bad business.

    boccio,

    The interface bug is displayed in the flash demo. As for the price, I don’t care either way.

    About the origins of the code, I was misled by the fact that you called it WP. Whatever, though; whether one makes a project reusing parts of WP or architects it from scratch, both are excellent things and only lead to a better array of choices.

    None of that is a real problem, as I said. But you’re being disingenous about the name thing. It’s incredibly sleazy. It’s cool that you like the WordPress name and it’s nice that you’d like to reuse it, but the term shall not be genericized.

    PS. On a constructive note, I was quite serious about the ickiness of the markup your tool presents to my browser. Once you’ve got the name issue sorted out I’d be happy to give you references to people who can help you produce the same look as your demo with WordPress-quality semantics. Then you can boast about careful craftsmanship, just like WP does.

    on my “wordpress” powered site in footer where says proudly powered by WordPress i also wrote and not some cheap imitation lol. just being a tease.

    A few thoughts…

    I don’t know if WordPress is a federally registered trademark, but it most certainly is a trademark. It’s a novel, coined phrase which designates a unique piece of software. The name appears numerous places on this site, which is about the software, and on blog admin pages as shipped. Just because a particular trademark is not federally registered in the US, doesn’t mean that it is still free for anyone to use. It just means that, in a lawsuit, the owners/users of that term have more to prove than if the mark was registered.

    A few more thoughts…

    1) Use of the phrase “WordPress” on the product, in conjunction with the type of language that WordPress uses, is confusing. “php-WordPress” implies that the makers of WordPress have different versions, such as “Windows-WordPress” or “HTML-WordPress.” This could be confusing to someone who came across the above site. It is especially confusing since it seems that php-WordPress is a similar and competing product to WordPress.

    2) The name of the website, word-press.net, is confusing. Persons looking for WordPress who did not know that it was all one word, could mis-spell the name, and come across the confusing website. Furthermore, that particular name of the site seems like an attempt to capitalize on the fame of the WordPress name/phrase. For example, why wasn’t the site named after the software itself, such as php-word-press.net? [which could still be confusing, but at least it makes more sense because it carries more of a connection to the product.]

    3) If the site is not intended to confuse consumers, why isn’t there a link to the WordPress.org site? For example, a disclaimer that reads, “This site is not affiliated with the open-source program WordPress. If you are looking for WordPress, please go to WordPress.org.” If the website owner was to provide such a disclaimer or redirect on the site, it would seem more likely that the owner was not trying to confuse consumers or divert consumers from the WordPress.org site.

    I’m not a lawyer, but it sure seems that there is sufficient moral justification to make a few changes to the offending website and the name of the product. Just my .02.

    @eveums:
    I do have to admit that you have made some good points here. Since my intention is not to confuse consumers, I took your advice (honestly – no idea why haven’t I done this before…), and put disclaimer in footer of my site, on every page. Just like you suggested. Hope this clears my intentions now.

    @firas:
    Thanks for the constructive note. My templates are still table-based, and migration to full CSS layout is definitely a must. Nevertheless, without any intention to troll here, I really think that table vs. CSS doesn’t make much difference for 85% of the clients when making decision what article manager to use…

    Anyhow, to cut the long story short: WordPress is a blogging tool (and personally, when it comes to those I really prefer MovableType), and my product is full-featured news/article CMS. Definitely a different niche. So any comments regarding “cheap clones” or such are just out of the scope here…

    boccio, to some people phpWordPress sounds like a php version of WordPress, and since WordPress is php-driven that wouldn’t make much sense. If you didn’t intend to confuse people, I believe you will, despite what you’ve written in the footer.

    I must say… if I had built a full-featured news/article CMS I certainly would not want anyone to confuse it with WordPress. I would want it to have a very clear brand identity of its own.

    And WordPress is now more than just a niche blogging tool. It is a world class “full-featured news/article CMS” and will doubtless continue to go from strength to strength.

    Good luck with yours, by the way. I wish you well, but feel it would be better all round if you renamed it (and in the long run, a wise move).

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • The topic ‘Here we go again’ is closed to new replies.