[wp-hackers] Re: Copyright violations by plugin in the WordPress
krustyruffle at rustykruffle.com
Sat Jun 28 06:33:03 GMT 2008
I'm thinking that, 1) since wordpress.org requires q GPL compatible (key
word: compatible) license, 2) no copyright notice was included to indicate
who owned the copyright, or what license was used, 3) GPL requires licensed
product to include GPL copyright notice as well as requiring qnyone using
GPL'd code to include the copyright licenses that were inncluded in all code
sources before the modifications (in this case none)...
I'm having a hard time seeing how this can be considered a GPL covered
plugin. If I looked at it I would assume that it was in fact released in the
public domain simply from the lack of copyright notice and the fact that it
was uploaded to a site that requires GPL compatability. I would assume that
anything not defining a propper liscence on such a site was public domain,
and I would hope that if that assumption were wrong that the author would at
least contact me to explain the oversight of forgetting the copyright
license in the original file and give me a chance to continue their efforts
in correcting that oversight by propperly including the licensing and
copyright information that they had somehow forgotten.
If I were the original copyright holder and I made such a mistake I would
greatly prefer to keep that on a level that would not involve making all
parties look like degenerate fools...
But that's just me, I am not a lawyer, and I certainly don't know what all
the possible licenses that can be uploaded to wordpress.org require, I
suppose it is posible that there are others, besides public domain, that may
not require a copyright or liscensing notice. I wish everyone involved the
best of luck untangling this twisted licensing mess and I am very gratefull
that I am not a part of it.
More information about the wp-hackers