Legal to redistribute “nulled” WordPress plugins and themes?
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
StevenGuest
I have wondered this a while. Many companies try to warn us about using nulled WordPress plugins, saying they contain malware.
VictoriaGuestWordPress requires the GPL license, which means all plugins and themes (add-ons) are also required to use the same license. And the GPL allows anyone to reuse or resell any of said GPL licensed software. Whether it contains malware or not, after being repackaged is a totally different issue and not relevant.
BobbyGuestHere’s a pretty good blog post about it:
DianeGuestits legal although considered “a*****e” behavior by most developers.
SaraGuestIf it’s legal, how do all these WordPress agencies submit hundreds of DMCA copyright complaints to Google and “hide” websites that resell the premium WP plugins?
WillieGuest“If your plugin is a derivative work of the GPL-covered software, then you can only publish/share/distribute your plugin under the terms of the GPL.
It is not clear when a plugin is a derivative work. It seems to be the belief of the FSF (the GPL authors) that the following aspects can indicate derivativeness:
the plugin is designed to be combined with a GPL’ed work, in particular that the plugin is nonfunctional without the GPL-covered software
the plugin is designed to be linked into the same process as the GPL’ed host application
the plugin accesses internal data structures of the host application, i.e. behaves as part of that application
In contrast, the FSF seems to believe that plugin-like services that run in separate processes and communicate over some protocol are not derivative works. For example, microservices communicating over a REST API are clearly separate works from each other. Similarly, AGPL-covered database servers have no licensing impact on the software connecting to that database.Some people believe that the FSF’s interpretation is incorrect, especially around linking. However, you are betting a business on interpretations of copyright law. It may be wise to assume the “worst case”, i.e. that the FSF’s interpretation would be upheld in a court.”
MelissaGuestChristineGuestThe main problem is after more than a decade of WordPress ecosystem and thousands of people earning a living that way, they didn’t bother to understand the GPL license and just assume they can use everyone’s free FOSS contributions to WordPress core but then tack on some s****y plugin with 1-2 basic features and charge a “license” and membership fee for that lame extension feature, such entitled mentality.
LEARN THE LAW AND GPL LICENSE
JerryGuestyou’re not wrong.
AliceGuestThe entitlement mentality is real, most of these devs have released no free software and don’t give back anything to the “community”
DavidGuestEveryone on every side of this issue is a jerk IMO
Matt has done nothing to nurture any sense of WordPress community over the years, he’s created a culture of selfish assholes that steal and gloat
JordanGuestRead NULLPARTY FAQ: https://www.nullparty.net/faq/
GloriaGuestam I supposed to feel sorry for Yoast and Awesome Motive lmao… nahhhh
RyanGuestHere’s from 11 years ago, very long-time source of confusion
JoanGuestIf it’s legal, how do all these WordPress agencies submit hundreds of DMCA copyright complaints to Google and “hide” websites that resell the premium WP plugins?
Because they count on no response from the null site owners. By default, Google deletes results from search if DMCA is not responded to.
If this sounds like totally hypocritical behavior from plugin agencies who do this, that’s because it is.
-
AuthorPosts