Wordpress v. Thesis
So, there’s this dispute over licensing. I won’t go over the points or the conversation or what the dispute is — see the link for info. However, I felt like making a couple statements about the debate.
First, let me say I’m in agreement with Chris Pearson’s ideology here. He feels he has the right to make decisions that suit his business, and I believe that all Americans have that right. So, I think Chris’s position is correct. However, by using Wordpress, Chris has already accepted and agreed to abide by the GPL. He, therefore, has agreed to be bound to the terms of the GPL, which means he has willingly foregone his rights (those rights, in particular, which the GPL has denoted).
Think of the GPL as an indentured servitude agreement — forgive the crude analogy, please. Years ago, Europeans (particularly the English, as I recall) signed contracts that essentially sold years of their lives and labor into servitude in exchange for transport and, eventually, property (of some kind) in the so-called New World. Chris Pearson might be thought of as one of these indentured servants, who has consented to the terms in order to reach the New World. Unfortunately for Chris, once he got to the New World he realized that he’d rather be free, but when he tries to go off on his own, he finds there are legal ramifications — namely, his breaching of the contract. Even though I would heartily disagree with indentured servitude, which is now illegal in the U.S., and strongly empathize with the indentured servants (Chris being the example) and their right to freedom, I would say that Chris has a responsibility by contract to abide by the terms of the agreement, whether or not I fundamentally empathize with his plight or agree with his means. There are only a few ways in which Chris could achieve his freedom without fulfilling the requirements originally agreed upon, and they include the following:
- Contractual amendment — Chris and Matt could agree to amend the contract on different terms, i.e. Chris is indentured for a lesser amount of time in exchange for something else
- Servitude abolition — the government could step in, assert that indentured servitude is illegal, and therefore free Chris of the contract to which he has subjected himself
Of course, option #1 has one major problem: the scenario is more complicated. Unlike the analogy where there is a contractual dispute between two parties, Wordpress is not owned by one person — the product is a culmination of thousands of contributors, who all own some unknown share of the product. This would be like the CEO of a company making a contractual amendment with an important client or vendor without the consent of the Board of Directors — but, even more significantly, this Board of Directors would literally be in the thousands. Thus, option #1 isn’t viable given the circumstances.
This leaves option #2. Unless free software is outlawed (and dear heavens, I hope not!), Chris would probably lose this case in the court.
To summarize, once again I agree with Chris’s position on the subject, but he has expressly agreed to the terms of the GPL but chosen to break the rules which he, effectively, imposed upon himself. Matt is ultimately correct here because there aren’t any reasonable ways to allow Chris to continue ignoring the terms of the GPL; furthermore, Matt is in a position where action must be taken in some form or another, because if action is not taken, it sets a precedent for similar situations in the future, which could effectively render all software licensing unenforceable. For this reason, if taken to court, ruling in favor of Chris would have extremely far-reaching ramifications.
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer and don’t claim to be. This is simply my opinion of the matter. I wish both Wordpress and Thesis the best of luck in resolving the dispute, and I respect both of their positions on the matter.