2 ms·

The copyright owner would always have more rights than someone using a GPL licensed copy of the source. Automattic itself doesn't have to abide by GPL terms fo

by tyingq 5y ago

The copyright owner would always have more rights than someone using a GPL licensed copy of the source. Automattic itself doesn't have to abide by GPL terms for whatever use they want to make of Wordpress, WooCommerce, etc. Edit: Seems there's no contributor licensing agreement for Wordpress, so complicated here. Though the general point of copyright holders having specific rights beyond licenses they release under is still relevant, IMO.

mirashii 5y ago
> Automattic itself doesn't have to abide by GPL terms for whatever use they want to make of Wordpress Yes they do. Automatic doesn’t own the copyright to all the code. Individual contributions are still copyrighted and licensed under the GPL. They would need permission from all previous contributors to relicense it to avoid having to comply with the GPL.
- tyingq 5y ago
  Sure, barring contributions made without contributor agreements in place. They seem to track "copyright holders" for wordpress core and it's not a huge list: https://codex.wordpress.org/Copyright_Holders https://codex.wordpress.org/Copyright_Holders
  - rmccue 5y ago
    This list is super out-of-date and in no way canonical; you’d need to check svn to see the real list of contributors. (The Codex is, to some degree, abandoned given the existence of the new developer documentation.) e.g: I’ve been a contributor to WordPress for about 17 years, I personally own the copyright to a huge chunk of WordPress’ source, and I am not on that list. :)
    - mirashii 5y ago
      I was going to point out a similar thing. I was a contributor for a few years in the mid-2000s
rmccue 5y ago
WordPress doesn’t have a CLA, so contributors retain rights to their contributions. Automattic is a major contributor to WordPress, and has an agreement with the Foundation to use the trademark, but otherwise has no special permissions†. Also, the Foundation owns the trademark, domains, and is the legal entity for events, but also does not own the copyright on the source code. († nb: some asterisks that only matter to WP insiders) (I’m a long-term contributor to WordPress.)

by tyingq 5y ago

mirashii 5y ago

> Automattic itself doesn't have to abide by GPL terms for whatever use they want to make of Wordpress Yes they do. Automatic doesn’t own the copyright to all the code. Individual contributions are still copyrighted and licensed under the GPL. They would need permission from all previous contributors to relicense it to avoid having to comply with the GPL.

tyingq 5y ago
Sure, barring contributions made without contributor agreements in place. They seem to track "copyright holders" for wordpress core and it's not a huge list: https://codex.wordpress.org/Copyright_Holders https://codex.wordpress.org/Copyright_Holders
- rmccue 5y ago
  This list is super out-of-date and in no way canonical; you’d need to check svn to see the real list of contributors. (The Codex is, to some degree, abandoned given the existence of the new developer documentation.) e.g: I’ve been a contributor to WordPress for about 17 years, I personally own the copyright to a huge chunk of WordPress’ source, and I am not on that list. :)
  - mirashii 5y ago
    I was going to point out a similar thing. I was a contributor for a few years in the mid-2000s

rmccue 5y ago

WordPress doesn’t have a CLA, so contributors retain rights to their contributions. Automattic is a major contributor to WordPress, and has an agreement with the Foundation to use the trademark, but otherwise has no special permissions†. Also, the Foundation owns the trademark, domains, and is the legal entity for events, but also does not own the copyright on the source code. († nb: some asterisks that only matter to WP insiders) (I’m a long-term contributor to WordPress.)