Re: Joomla Copyright in GPL

haneyhack · Post by **haneyhack** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:25 pm

So I come across a site http://www.wisedot.ca and it appears they have rebranded the joomla code and are selling it as thier own. Is that a copyright viloation or is this acceptable? An example of where it has been sold is at http://ridgemeadowshomeshow.com/ and http://www.ridgemeadowschamber.com/ 

Predator · Post by **Predator** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:47 am

Moved to S&I Forum for further investigation.

Post by **MMMedia** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:51 pm

In both sites you mention you can see this is the source of the webites:

Code: Select all

<meta name="Generator" content="Joomla! - Copyright (C) 2005 - 2006 Open Source Matters. All rights reserved.">

but even if that was not there the real issue would be if they kept the copyright information in the source code itself. There is nothing forbidding anyone from rebranding Joomla! as long as they keep the copyright notices in the source code.

Predator · Post by **Predator** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 3:01 pm

MMMedia wrote:In both sites you mention you can see this is the source of the webites:
Code: Select all
<meta name="Generator" content="Joomla! - Copyright (C) 2005 - 2006 Open Source Matters. All rights reserved.">
but even if that was not there the real issue would be if they kept the copyright information in the source code itself. There is nothing forbidding anyone from rebranding Joomla! as long as they keep the copyright notices in the source code.

Yes that is the prob.

Funny out of the content:

"The award winning WiseSite PRO CMS software installed and configured."

Backend:

http://www.wisedot.ca/administrator/

So if they use the icons from food but named it new they violate the icon license, but at least it looks for my as a cheap try to make money out of Joomla! and give it out as their own.

Asphyx · Post by **Asphyx** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 3:06 pm

Well they sure aren't any good at the attempt...
They changed the logo on the admin login but it still says Joomla is free software released under the GPL lol...

Post by **MMMedia** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 3:25 pm

There have been a number of vendors that have rebranded Joomla! If they are keeping the copyright.php intact in the source code and any copyright notices in the individual pages in the source code then from what I understand they are not breaking any of the copyright or licensing rules (as long as they are following the rest of the license... I am speaking strictly of rebranding).

Please note.. I am not saying that this is right or good to do, in fact I don't agree with it, and think it shows bad form on the part of vendors that do this.

Asphyx · Post by **Asphyx** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:26 pm

Well in this particular case (mind you I didn't really check out everything they did just went to that login page) What they did in their rebranding (changing the Joomla image with their own image, I don't really have a problem with that in itself. I find may clients who I have set Joomla up for want their own logo in that spot to identify it's their admin section.

But as far as the rest it is possible to do any rebranding you want from the template itself...
Instead of displaying the default joomla footer with the include command I usually set a modposition there and create a custom footer for them and unless they complain loudly I usually put powered by joomla somewhere in there with their own copyright notices.
I don't usually credit myself on those sites but it is just as easy for someone who wants to rebrand their product using joomla to create a default set up with their custom footer and place their branding in it for distribution...

that way they are not changing any actual code, just adding their own...

but I personally find it distasteful to try and take credit for someone else's work via rebranding...The Client will love you just as much for giving them Joomla irregardless of whether you actually wrote it or not!
No need to hide the fact it is open source and freely available...besides all the rebranding make 4 times the work anytime you want to upgrade the core!

haneyhack · Post by **haneyhack** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:03 pm

So from reading the posts it appears that it is OK (not license or copyright violation so legal?) to rebrand and sell the Joomla system, just not ethical?

Post by **Tonie** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:09 pm

You can indeed rebrand and sell, IMO it indeed isn't ethical. They would have to leave the contributors to the files though, and all changes that they do to the system will be open source as well.

Predator · Post by **Predator** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:09 pm

haneyhack wrote:So from reading the posts it appears that it is OK (not license or copyright violation so legal?) to rebrand and sell the Joomla system, just not ethical?

Selling it is not ok. You can take a fee for your work but can't sell it as a product.

Post by **Tonie** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:18 pm

Here is a FAQ about the GPL. It does mention that you can sell it. Not that I understand some of it immediately

.

Predator · Post by **Predator** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:21 pm

Tonie wrote:Here is a FAQ about the GPL. It does mention that you can sell it. Not that I understand some of it immediately .

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.h ... Term 

haneyhack · Post by **haneyhack** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:02 pm

Thanks all. Interesting discussion and probably more far reaching then just Joomla as it affects the rebranding and selling of any GNU software.

After reading the posts and associated links it appears that you can sell Joomla after rebranding as your own, you can also resell it WITHOUT rebranding. It also appears that ANY GNU software can be sold as your own (no clients ever look at souce code so you can leave in all the license and copyright info anyway), whether you rebrand it or not.

So I applaud those working on Joomla and any other "free" software development. I'm not sure I could spend the time and effort working on something for free to have another grab the finished product and then sell it as their own.

Asphyx · Post by **Asphyx** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:38 pm

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html#ConfusingTerm

That seems to be the main problem....The legality speaks to the wording used for the act not the act itself!

Basically it is wrong to say I am selling you Joomla for $50..but it's just fine and dandy to say I'll give you Joomla for $50!
Oh the sematics of law! LOL

I don't see any major wrongness about rebranding but maybe that too should be defined with better wording.
Perhaps it would be better to say you can REDRESS Joomla and distribute as opposed to REBRAND.

To me a REBRAND attempts to hide the fact it is known as Joomla and to me that is against the GPL. All redistibutions must be clear that Joomla is Joomla so that the user can know where upgrades are available.

the phrase rebranding should be reserved for forked projects where the developer has modified the core.
But a simple change of the admin templates should be defined as a redress.. Since no code was changed the brand name certainly should not be changed. As long as it is clear to their client that the name of the program being used is Joomla I don't see anything wrong with that.

That would also comply with the rest of the redistribution restrictons about providing the full package in an updatable form.
a rebrand would seem to be against that since if you don't know what software your running you couldn't possibly know where to get the updates from!

digitaldentist · Post by **digitaldentist** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:40 pm

GPL is only for REDISTRIBUTION

When redistributing a GPL Product you must offer the original source
you must offer your source as well

While legally you can not be charged for the GPL product , they can charge for Media Access
Support Services (Such as, Offering it as download, installing it, customizing it, the price of the CD-Rom it came on)
To further make matters more interesting, the could easily add their own original work to the modified product and license / sell that product as a separate item