GetSimple Support Forum
Understanding the GPLv3 License - Printable Version

+- GetSimple Support Forum (http://get-simple.info/forums)
+-- Forum: GetSimple (http://get-simple.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General Questions and Problems (http://get-simple.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Thread: Understanding the GPLv3 License (/showthread.php?tid=4408)

Pages: 1 2

Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-03

Seems I don't completely understand the distribution terms of the GPLv3 license.

I want to inquire about how one can bundle GetSimple CMS with a theme that has whatever license and distribute the whole package in a marketplace?

How can one appropriately bundle/package/release a whole installation with theme while keeping the theme closed source or other commercial friendly licensed while still satisfying the terms of the GPLv3 license of the other parts?

User friendliness is paramount and is the reason for my inquiry about deploying a single package of both a theme and installation.

thank you.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-03

anyone? What's Chris and the community's thoughts on this?

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shovenose - 2013-03-04

Chris? He's out of the picture and isn't part of GS anymore, so it doesn't matter what his opinion is.
I don't know, in fact I would like to know the answer to this too because it might help me in an upcoming venture.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - mvlcek - 2013-03-04

(2013-03-03, 11:11:48)WebDevandPhoto Wrote: Seems I don't completely understand the distribution terms of the GPLv3 license.

I want to inquire about how one can bundle GetSimple CMS with a theme that has whatever license and distribute the whole package in a marketplace?

How can one appropriately bundle/package/release a whole installation with theme while keeping the theme closed source or other commercial friendly licensed while still satisfying the terms of the GPLv3 license of the other parts?

User friendliness is paramount and is the reason for my inquiry about deploying a single package of both a theme and installation.

thank you.

As I understand the GPLv3 (see http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq#GPLModuleLicense and http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq#GPLAndPlugins), any module and plugin for a GPLv3 licensed program must be GPLv3 licensed. This definitely applies to plugins and IMHO even to themes - they won't run without GetSimple and are thus modules or plugins.

So you can sell a theme or plugin, but you must distribute it to your buyers under the GPLv3 (or a compatible license), which means
Summary of my interpretation of the GPLv3: You can bundle your theme/plugin with GetSimple and you can sell it for money, but the whole bundle must be distributed under the GPLv3 and you must provide the source code, if asked for it.
If your first buyer decides to put your theme/plugin bundle on a server for free downloading - bad luck.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shovenose - 2013-03-04

now THAT is suckish. Nevermind me making my template a GS theme then. I think that's bad, because now people that want to make premium themes can't Sad

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-04

Something doesn't sound right about that... my plugin is indicative of my theme and 98% of the code can function without GetSimple.
If GS can't have an amended license (dual license options may be possible) to where buyers aren't allowed to distribute our themes then there's ABSOLUTELY no point to making commercially available themes.
No I think something is really wrong about this.
No website software will last if developers/theme designers can not have the right to sell their work and retain both attribution for their work and require it to be purchased.
That was not my interpretation of GPLv3, hence why I was pre-maturely excited about it when I first showed up on this forum.

Edit:
We'll see what StackOverflow members suggest:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15190697/gplv3-terms-concerning-theme-designers

If it matches up to what mvleck was saying then we have a serious problem and I'll be leaving GS if it can't be amended.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - n00dles101 - 2013-03-04

This topic has been covered all over the web with other GPLv3 CMSs (Wordpress, drupal, joomla etc... )

Looks line mvlcek's interpretation is correct..

No big deal as far as I can see , other sites sell premium themes for these CMSs without problems...

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - n00dles101 - 2013-03-04

Checkout how ThemeForest covers Split licensing for themes/plugins...

http://support.envato.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/428


Also interesting letter regarding themes within WP also GPLv3 which I would consider also to apply to GetSimple

http://wordpress.org/news/2009/07/themes-are-gpl-too/

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-04

Thank you n00dles101, that instilled a vote of confidence in me.

The first link helped alot:
http://support.envato.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/428

I don't agree with the Software Freedom Law Center interpretation of the custom theme PHP files that call on functions of Wordpress. For various reasons. I believe those specific terms of the GPL license should be challenged in a court of law.

But as far as Envato's split licensing, that works for protecting our work.
As far as including GS in a bundle for a theme deployment on ThemeForest, I'm not so sure.

Any chance of this being officially clarified in some legally acceptable fashion?
If so, how and by whom?

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shovenose - 2013-03-04

Hmm,
what license could we change GS to that allows us to sell ecrypted or other licensed code, but still use in GS?

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-04

What do you think about these ones?
http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
http://opensource.org/licenses/apache2.0.php
http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause
http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-2.0.php
http://opensource.org/licenses/mozilla1.1.php
http://creativecommons.org/about/license/

From reading, MIT and Apache license are the most business friendly licenses as they are not "copy-left" but rather just require you to include an original license file if you include the open source in your commercial project.

Could anyone verify this?

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-06

any word on this?

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - n00dles101 - 2013-03-06

Any word on what?

GPLv3 works and works well for us and I don't see us changing.

Will you also be requesting Joomla, wordpress , drupal to change their licensing aswell ??

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - mvlcek - 2013-03-06

(2013-03-06, 07:17:34)n00dles101 Wrote: GPLv3 works and works well for us and I don't see us changing.

And anyway, I don't think it's possible. Only the copyright holder(s) could release a GPLv3 software under a non-compatible license. I suppose, this would be all the authors that ever contributed to GetSimple...

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shovenose - 2013-03-06

I don't understand half of this. But if we can't make paid themes/plugins that's absolutely ridiculous.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shovenose - 2013-03-06

It's like saying, "yeah, this linux OS is free and open source, but you can't run it on servers you use to sell hosting to people"

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shawn_a - 2013-03-06

Heh you cannot arbitrarily change the license. You guys are funny.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-06

@n00dles101 I don't know why you're comparing to such drastically different products. GetSimple is not exactly like Joomla, Wordpress , Drupal. The only substantial similarity that I see is just in the term content management system. The reason I even looked at GetSimple in the first place was searching for MICRO CMS on open source license for simple and small whole package deployments for clients. From my understanding of this new-ish term... GetSimple qualifies as a MCMS. And I estimate current usage of GetSimple is also no where near that of any leading CMS. Not that won't change over time... BUT... the underlying issue to my question has not been directly addressed.
which is... DO developers have permission to sell complete packages* of GetSimple for single deployment which include any combination of custom themes,plugins, and/or modified core code in that package?
*Only if a disclaimer which states that GetSimple is GPLv3 with a link to download the source of the core files (and any core modifications) and if a GPLv3 license document is included in the package.

Second issue (which was more or less addressed already):
Can themes for get simple be sold under a entirely different license?

These are the bottom line issues for which reason I opened this thread in the first place. The primary issue has not been directly addressed. And not addressing genuine valid concerns will push developers (like me) away. It's not like I'm asking for any coding work to be done or any burden-ly grievous actions.... I'm just asking for direct answers.

This is a serious concern of mine (and it seems to be a similar concern of others) and I am not goofing around or pulling anyone's leg. I am legitimately concerned and want to make sure I'm not stepping on anyone's toes.

so please provide a direct answer so I can confidently make the right decision on what I will do with my time concerning future theme development for this product.

edit reason: fixing typos

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - mvlcek - 2013-03-06

(2013-03-04, 08:49:11)n00dles101 Wrote: Checkout how ThemeForest covers Split licensing for themes/plugins...

http://support.envato.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/428


Also interesting letter regarding themes within WP also GPLv3 which I would consider also to apply to GetSimple

http://wordpress.org/news/2009/07/themes-are-gpl-too/

@WebDevandPhoto: At least your second question seems to be answered by the GPLv3 FAQ and the second of n00dles101's link:
Yes, you can sell your theme:
  • your CSS and image files can be under any license, as long as
  • your PHP template files (and theme-specific plugins) are under the GPLv3.

As the important work when creating a theme, are images and CSS, this should be no problem.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-06

@mvlcek thank you, yea I tried to say I'm satisfied with the 2nd question's answer.. it's just the first one question about putting the a whole bundle (my theme, plugin with GS core) into a zip file and then selling that zip file to clients....
I'm assuming the following condition must be done:
include a disclaimer and the GPLv3 license file (for the GS core and plugin) in the zip package.

Is this permissible?

Edit:
to be more clear...
I'm looking for a direct public answer from administrators of this project.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - n00dles101 - 2013-03-06

I'm not trying to compare GS with any of these products. Your Github page says you'll be releasing FoundationNation for various different CMSs aswell as GetSimple. As these are also covered by GPLv3, why is GetSimple any different?

From what I understand you can take GetSimple and distribute it with your themes/plugins and charge whatever you want for it,
but GetSimple and the portion of you HTML/PHP code must remain GPLv3.

Not sure if I like the idea of distributing modified core version of GetSimple and still calling it GetSimple though as its not officially GetSimple.

If you have changes to the core that you need done, why not submit them to the Issue tracker on Github.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - WebDevandPhoto - 2013-03-06

(2013-03-06, 20:23:15)n00dles101 Wrote: Your Github page says you'll be releasing FoundationNation for various different CMSs aswell as GetSimple. As these are also covered by GPLv3, why is GetSimple any different?
To answer that, I won't package the other CMS or software with my themes because they are way too large. I've been looking for a Micro CMS so I could do a complete ready to go package without depending on any existing installation (other than PHP environment of course). What ever MCMS I choose I want to choose for that option alone.

(2013-03-06, 20:23:15)n00dles101 Wrote: From what I understand you can take GetSimple and distribute it with your themes/plugins and charge whatever you want for it,
but GetSimple and the portion of you HTML/PHP code must remain GPLv3.

Not sure if I like the idea of distributing modified core version of GetSimple and still calling it GetSimple though as its not officially GetSimple.

If you have changes to the core that you need done, why not submit them to the Issue tracker on Github.

Thank you n00dles! This was exactly the public response I was hoping for!
COOL! sorry if I struck a funny chord for a moment there... everything's kosher now! thank you! Big Grin

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shawn_a - 2013-03-07

This thread should be prefixed by a big fat INAL.
There is no official anything by anyone it is all about how the license is interpreted.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - n00dles101 - 2013-03-07

lol, had to look up what the hell INAL was...

Yes as Shawn has said this is NOT an official answer from the GS team.
This is my understanding of the way the license works.

RE: Understanding the GPLv3 License - shovenose - 2013-03-08

What official GS team? Sure we are on the team page but we are so divided it doesn't even serve a purpose.
But I guess the question is answered. I can't sell premium gs templates.