0
Welcome Guest! Login
0 items Join Now

All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

Last Post
Search Topic

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • James S! wrote:
      • Everyone is
      • being courteous and engaging in
      • pleasant,
      • intellectual discussion :)

      Posts get close when flaming starts and I have a feeling that will not start here :)
      camelgrass wrote:
      RocketTheme is about freedom

      Good community attributes. I give you two more points on Yoono
      Keep it up guys and to everyone reading this
    • No money to extend membership :(
    #71917
    • Andy Miller's Avatar
    • Andy Miller
    • Preeminent Rocketeer
    • Posts: 9919
    • Thanks: 96
    • Web Kahuna

    Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • I've seen this question a few times, so I'll hazard to answer it:

      Q: Why are templates so different from extensions and have an exception in the GPL license?

      A: Ok, there are three main reasons.

      1) First the GPL says that derivative work should be GPL. Modules, and Components generally follow the same structure and calls as core joomla versions, any component written have a lot of similarity in structure to the core ones upon which they are based, hence their derivative nature.

      2) The GPL was written primarily to handle code, and code is compiled in some form. Any time one bit of code is compiled with another bit of code, even if this is php, and we're talking includes, it's compiled into one memory space of a computer and handled as one entity. A module or component is mainly code, so this makes up the vast majority of the work. You end up with a cumulative bit of executable code that because it's running with GPL code, should be GPL as a whole.

      Now templates, templates are a little bit of php so any PHP that gets compiled and runs in a single memory space should theoretically be GPL. HOWEVER, images, css and javascript are not compiled into this homogenous GPL code, they are infact sent seperately to the user's computer where the user's browser actually handles them all in seperate threads. There is not ever any interaction with the GPL part which is by this point, from the users perspective, rendered HTML. Templates by and large are mostly images, css, and javascript, the NON-GPL part. Hence the exception made in the GPL for them.

      3) Third, and most importantly. Modules and Extensions are mostly code, they may have some GUI parts, and some maybe as much GUI as a template, but this is a general rule, and not a blanket definitive statement. Templates are mostly GUI stuff, with very little code, further more, templates are 'artistic works' and come under other copyright rules where the GPL just does not have relevance.

      NOTE: I think it's important to understand that templates are considered "skins" that are applied on top of code. They just change the way something looks. The GPL is about free software, and a "skin" is not really considered software and it's usually very unique to an individual owner. This is probably why an exception was made for templates in the first place. Also note, that this exception was not put in for joomla templates, it was put in way before there was even a joomla.
      camelgrass wrote:
      I did read the complete thread and acknowledge the answers you are talking about. At this particular moment I don't agree with the justifications given for templates being outside the restrictions of the GPL. Even though it is more of an issue to do with the actual terms of the GPL itself, I chose to raise the issue here, in context of the thread, so I can hopefully learn more and maybe even change my current stance ;).
    • Last Edit: 17 years 10 months ago by Andy Miller.
    #71919

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • Either way camel grass if you have a problem with templates being (partially) exempt it should be taken up with teh GPL people and NOT with the joomla people.

      It is their rule not Joomlas.
    • www.ninjoomla.com - The Ninjoomla Open Source Extension Club
      Over 50 open source extensions and 100 videos to you build the site you want.
    #72052
    • Mack's Avatar
    • Mack
    • Elite Rocketeer
    • Posts: 535
    • Thanks: 0

    Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • James S! wrote:
      Posts get close when flaming starts and I have a feeling that will not start here :)

      All muffin recipes, past/present/future should be GPL. No more secret recipes, no more encrypted ingredients. Frostings, icings, and designs, are not to be considered artwork or skins and must be released under the same GPL.
    #72062

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • Mack wrote:
      James S! wrote:
      Posts get close when flaming starts and I have a feeling that will not start here :)

      All muffin recipes, past/present/future should be GPL. No more secret recipes, no more encrypted ingredients. Frostings, icings, and designs, are not to be considered artwork or skins and must be released under the same GPL.

      LMAO! :D

      You may be able to find my recipes free, from across the new. But I would be damned if you shall get the support from freemuffins.com when your belt snaps
      This image is hidden for guests.
      Please log in or register to see it.


      ---

      See, explaining everything in Muffins makes more sense methinks :)
    • James Spencer / Developer & Support / Hull, UK
    #72063

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • Andy,

      I hope I don't seem obtuse or obnoxious, but my reading of this thread is still that people are now free to publically post the PHP source of any existing commercial components and modules.

      Yet, "if nothing has changed," that would not be true. And also, you say that anything released under a non-GPL license remains under a non-GPL license.

      So...I'm confused. Seems that the mistake was releasing components and modules under an erroneous understanding of the GPL at the very beginning. So...commercial, proprietary components were GPL all along. Even though their authors may not have known it and released their works under another license, that mistake has now been corrected, and it's legal to post the PHP source code, or just email it to friends.

      Not that any of us necessary like it this way or want it this way, but it's this way. Or, it's going to become this way.

      Yes?

      Roger
    #72074

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • Andy,

      I'm reading the GPL at www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html and it says :
      10. If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author to ask for permission. For software which is copyrighted by the Free Software Foundation, write to the Free Software Foundation; we sometimes make exceptions for this. Our decision will be guided by the two goals of preserving the free status of all derivatives of our free software and of promoting the sharing and reuse of software generally.

      So basically the Joomla devs can just give a blanket permission to commercial developers to incorporate certain parts of the Joomla code into their extensions. The license explicitly preserves the right of the developers to do this, and explicitly states that it's a judgment call. Why ignore this part of the license?

      Of course, it has to be a "free program," but what people can pay for is the download, and the distribution conditions would be set by the author. In other words, nothing would change.

      If the goal is to really respect the license, then...why not respect the license? It's obvious that this clause was included to prevent the license from turning into a tyrant that simply GPL's everything it touches while ignoring the greater good.

      Roger
    • Last Edit: 17 years 10 months ago by Roger Davis.
    #72075

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • The problem is roger, that the license aren't defaulted to GPL until you can prove that a significant enough amount of GPL code is present in them to force them to be GPL.

      As an example my ezelogo module could be modified in about 3 seconds to contain to calls to joomla code and use a fixed url.

      THen I would be free to release it under any license.

      If you were to put that on yoru site and distribute it without permission I would be able to sue you for license infringement.

      If you were to start distributing non gpl code, then you will potentiall get sued for it. The case will not be to determine if their license is valid or not, but to prove if you infringed their license.

      If you want to start offering their code for DL free of litigation then you must first prove in a court of law that their current license is invalid. Just because 'joomla says' on a website that they are invalid doesn't mean they are.

      Joomla! has said that it is not in the itnerests of the community to take such legal action at this time.

      To further add to this the country where you are distributing from may or may not have it's own laws that detract from this.

      e.g. if you country -requires- a warranty and -requires- that a saleable product be fit for an intended use than it will be difficult or even impossible to license it GPL, as these two things are part of the GPL license - no warranty and no guarantee of being fit for a specific purpose, even the saleable one.

      Local government -laws- override business -licenses-.

      I hope that makes it a little clearer?
    • www.ninjoomla.com - The Ninjoomla Open Source Extension Club
      Over 50 open source extensions and 100 videos to you build the site you want.
    #72076

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • Daniel,

      I don't know if it makes it clear, but it starts us down the road to clarity. Your statement that "licenses aren't defaulted to GPL until you can prove that a significant enough amount of GPL code is present in them to force them to be GPL," is very illuminating. Now I only need to understand what "significant" means. Is that 10% of the code? 20%? Or is it defined in some other way?

      However, that's not the language given in the Joomla statement on extensions, which is:
      It is our opinion that most extensions are derivative works of Joomla! and must be licensed under the GNU GPL. It is possible that an extension could work within Joomla! and not be considered a derivative work according to copyright law but this would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If you believe your extension is not a derivative work we strongly recommend that you seek professional legal advice.

      But you are saying that your extension is an example, yes? If so, then this could serve as a test case for extension that are outside the GPL, and that would be immensely helpful. I haven't seen such an example yet. The language given the Joomla statement seems to suggest that it's only a theoretical possibility, that there are no known examples, which I find confusing.

      Do others agree that your extension is such an example? Is there consensus?

      Roger
    #72078

  • Re: All commercial extensions & templates available for Joomla are now open source?

    Posted 17 years 10 months ago
    • I have a module I'd like to release that uses mosGetParam to get it's parameters, and it uses statements like $database ->setQuery and $result = $database->query();

      The $database is a class, right? And it's a very significant class, in that Joomla couldn't work without it. So is that enough to GPL my module? Do I need to rewrite my code get the database results in a nonstandard, but also non-GPL, way?

      You see the ambiguity...it's an insignificant number of lines, but it's a very significant class. Your post refers only to the quantity of code, not it's importance in the big scheme of things.

      If there's consensus on this from the core, that would be good to know.

      WHat's Andy's opinion?

      Roger
    • Last Edit: 17 years 10 months ago by Roger Davis.
    #72079

Time to create page: 0.085 seconds