The Name ‘Awada‘ is not your copyright name so you can’t say it unethical to use it and second the design and look is completely different from your theme.
You saying that there are some portion that is same as your theme, could you explain which section you are talking about?
And one star rating you give us just because our theme name sound like your’s is very immature thing you have ever done.
Name and product is not your’s so please stop act like immature.
- This reply was modified 3 months, 1 week ago by WebHunt Infotech.
OK, let’s calm down. No name calling or I’m closing this review down.
*Looks more, sees the initial check in was 10 months ago*
@webhuntinfotech So… here’s the thing. IMHO the “Awada” (with a W) theme name is a problem. The theme name “Avada” (with a V) is a really well recognized in the WordPress community.
If I were on the theme review team looking at this theme then I would not have approved it for that reason. Here’s the Detailed Plugin Guideline on that topic item 17.
The block quote is going to ruin the formatting but the text is good. I’ve bolded the last sentence for emphasis.
17. Respect trademarks and projects.
The use of trademarks or other projects as the sole or initial term of a plugin slug is prohibited unless proof of legal ownership/representation can be confirmed. For example, the WordPress Foundation has trademarked the term “WordPress” and it is a violation to use “wordpress” in a domain name. This policy extends to plugin slugs.
As another example, only employees of Facebook should use the slug “Facebook,” or their brand in a context such as “Facebook Dancing Sloths.” Non-employees should use a format such as “Dancing Sloths for Facebook” instead to avoid potentially misleading users into believing the plugin was developed by Facebook. Similarly, if you don’t represent the “Chart.js” project, it’s inappropriate to use that as the name of your plugin.
Original branding is recommended as it not only helps to avoid confusion, but is more memorable to the user.
Say out loud “Avada Awada Avada Avada Awada Awada” a few times and you’ll see where I am going with this.
Now for the sticky part: I am not a member of the theme review team. They work very hard and I’m just a support forum volunteer who happens to be a moderator. My opinion on this matter isn’t necessarily pertinent.
So I am going to head over to the Slack #themereview channel and report this review to them.
It is very possible that nothing will change. Or they may ask for more information, or make a decision (if there’s one to be made). Whatever action the TRT takes (or doesn’t take) please respect that and refrain from anymore accusations.
First, please only leave reviews for the actual theme on its merits as a theme. If you have a copyright or trademark complaint, bring it up with the Theme Review Team. You can ping me (
@greenshady) privately via the WordPress Slack chat anytime with the details, which will be discussed among the key reviewer group (https://make.wordpress.org/themes/handbook/the-team/members/#key-reviewers).
The theme review team was notified of this potential conflict months ago. We came to the conclusion that nothing was being done in bad faith.
If there is new information or anything has changed since then that you think we should consider, please get in touch.
The ThemeFusion guys and Jan are completely right.
Somewhere it’s outrageous, elsewhere it’s just pathetic and funny that a theme with this name has been approved in the official WordPress theme directory.
You – WordPress God and WP Theme Review Team – you all can repeat the argument “We came to the conclusion that nothing was being done in bad faith” a quadrillion times, but neither the origin of the argument nor any other kind of emphasis will make it a less false and fake one.
Publishing a WordPress theme these days with the name Awada – Come on, why not Diwi? Maybe Enfolt/Enwold?
That’s just like the fake brands available on cheap markets and in asian countries such as Powasonic, Rejbok and the alike. Illegal? No, of course, no copyright infringement, LOLZ. Unethical? It absolutely is. And it’s pretty sad to see such companies appearing ( as approved!!! ) on the beloved WP theme repo.
Deceiving potential WP users and using a slightly-modified version of a successful brand to get competitive advantage – if this is not bad faith in the business, then what the hell is it?
We forgot about this and somehow missed the two original replies and only saw the most recent one.
For the record, we’re stunned that you feel “nothing was being done in bad faith” … wow.
We’d love to hear in detail why you decided it was not done in bad faith … could you please take the time to explain?
- This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by themefusion.
- You must be logged in to reply to this review.