[License-discuss] WordPress GPL software

[zak]

I stumbled across a site (https://www.gplkey.com) that sells
WordPress-related themes, plugins, etc. at a much cheaper price than their
developers sell them for. I'd actually like to recommend this site but, not
if it's illegal.  It would be helpful if I knew what the licencing was, for
the themes, plugins, etc but it's not clear (or present at all) on most of
the sales pages.  So technically, it seems like it's ok to sell these
products for less.  No..?

I'm having a confusing time understanding licensing and copyright
infringement.  I expect that this kind of re-sale would not sit well with
the original developers of the products, but it's a great option for people
on a budget who would appreciate an opportunity to obtain these software
applications for considerably less -- with the understanding of course that
the firesale price doesn't come with any kind of support.  Heck, I would
pay that price... IF it wasn't illegal (haven't bought anything yet).

Like I say, I would like to recommend this site (and use it myself) but I
also don't want to be associated with anything illegal. I'd just like to
understand the licensing and copyright restrictions and whether I could
justify recommending that people buy WP-related products from this site.







On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 8:17 AM Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com> wrote:

> It would help if you would name the specific module and vendor.
> There is certainly nothing wrong with making another module that does the
> same thing as a high-priced one, and selling that.
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 3:15 AM Florian Weimer <fw at deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
>
>> * zak:
>>
>> > SPECIFICALLY, can someone else legally re-distribute (sell for less or
>> give
>> > away) the commercially available software (eg. themes and plugins),
>> without
>> > permission of the people who developer them? Are the modified,
>> commercially
>> > available themes, plugins, etc also GPL simply because they are created
>> > using original WordPress GPL software?
>>
>> Practically speaking, you cannot know what kind of arrangements the
>> commercial distributor has made with other authors.  After all, they
>> may have permission to distribute something under non-GPL terms.
>>
>> Even if they don't, that's between them and the owners of the
>> copyright that they infringe.  It does not give further recipients
>> permission to infringe *their* copyright.  (There's something odd in
>> the GPLv3 in this regard, but I don't think that can apply if you only
>> get to that point by an upgrade from the GPLv2.)
>>
>> There's also a possibility that these authors use a subscription model
>> where source code access is one of the services they provide, and you
>> are not allowed to provision that service to third parties (without
>> violating the terms of the subscription agreement).  I believe the
>> general assumption is that such terms are acceptable if one can end
>> the subscription at any time and exercise all relevant rights under
>> the GPL.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> License-discuss mailing list
>> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
>>
>> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
>>
>
>
> --
> Bruce Perens - Partner, OSS.Capital.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190926/798ba5fa/attachment.html>