As far as the ability to work independantly, or with another piece of non-gpl software instead of wordpress, it would be trivial to create a simple theme framework that provided the basics of the wordpress theme environment. I could make one that had stubs with dummy content for all of the important methods in wp in about 4 hours, and then bsd license the thing. The funny part of that is that it would actually be able to run a website with static content were you to just adjust a few things in the stub file… example:

function the_post(){
return 'content here.';
}


With these things taken care of there wouldn’t be the gpl requirement onus on your themes. The same would hold true for plugins.

Any for you guys arguing the gpl viralness applying to css, you are completely wrong. Read this article:
http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5041108431.html

Pay attention to the part pertaining to binary modules not being infected by the gpl when using standard unix interfaces. css uses standard interfaces for things, and as mikec has noted, wordpress doesn’t own the rights to the selectors used in the css file. Also, at the worst, the problem would be license incompatibility, not gpl viralness. The license for the theme wouldn’t be compatible with wordpress and it would be against the gpl license for the person USING wordpress to use the theme with it. It would have no effects on the theme creator.

Removing the link (not paid for) is the same as breaking the law and action can be taken against you.

Umm, no. Violating any law is a criminal offense that results in jail time, this would be a civil offense that results of monetary fines, and probably not a very large one.

Not even close to the same thing.

As we’re soon to be making money from premium themes (both WordPress.com and through our own system) we’ve taken a long hard look at this and come up with this precaution, just in case:

Our themes come with separate styles, which are essentially a configuration file, images and so on. The styles can and will be distributed separately from the themes as they’re independent entities. They need WordPress to run, but that doesn’t make them into GPL. Just like an image only viewable in GIMP doesn’t become GPL either.

Professional coders, paid a living, can and do contribute hugely to open source projects. But the money has to come from somewhere – being able to do some added effort work to complement our GPL work makes this possible.

At least WordPress accept that theme builders need to earn a living if they’re to get the best themes possible – hence the marketplace giving 50% of proceeds to the developers. That may not sound generous, but with GPL they could cheerfully pick up themes for free and then sell them at a profit. So here’s a woo for WordPress.com I just hope they get on and finish that damn marketplace before I retire!

Software is made for replication.

The more people using a piece of software makes it stronger in the marketplace. Replication meets the goal of software to present a solution to a wide need.
Design is entirely different. A million people using the same exact Wordpress release empowers the commmunity – a million people using the same exact design would hinder the community and make it look like the software wasn’t capable of much creativity.

No matter how dishonest we may wish to be in a debate like this the facts are almost all of us want a site that looks as unique as we are able to achieve given our resources of time and capital.

Wordpress is a presentation piece of software and we don’t mind that. What we don’t want is for the presentation itself – our sites – to look exactly like a thousand other sites.

In other words what every web designer worthy of the title already knows is that the central need of the web site owner is not replication but creative uniqueness otherwise known in the business word as branding.

By very definition the only way to protect uniqueness is to limit its distribution. Like it or not it meets a core need of the community.

The second error people make is that they tend to define the open source community in a way that excludes a large part of the community in favor of frankly people looking for a free ride and little else. There is a HUGE portion of the wordpress community that is attempting to use wordpress for financial gain. I can’t remember the last time I have gone to a wordpress blog and not seen an ad of some sort – even you have a link to a site where you are soliciting paid work.

So although there are those that will froth at the mouth at the truth of it – a huge part and in fact the majority of the community is engaged in using wordpress in “money grubbing business”. No, that should not automatically argue that people should pay for designs but rather that being involved in business of some sort the wordpress community has a an additional business need to have unique looking sites and premium themes allows them a measure of that uniqueness for those who can’t afford totally custom jobs.

What many on your side argue for is a situation where only the relatively affluent could achieve basic web site goals using wordpress.

No offense but I often find that those championing against premium themes are those who do custom wordpres work without batting an eye. They intend to share their designs and programming with no one but the paying client and then bristle that theme designers share their work with more of the community than their custom job ever will.

By any rational logic sharing a design with only one person is less helpful to a community that sharing it with 7 or 8 people. I submit that those arguing against premium themes should take a less hypocritical stance and also take a stand against closed custom jobs. Share it ALL with the community.

However should we even be able to go that route it would still violate the central need of a website to have a unique site for itself.

I guess the bright side is that I would have a great bit of eye candy that I could jack the css for with no qualms since it would be GPL and clearly electronically distributed.

Incidentally if you think the design process is over with the sketch or PSD then you really don’t understand web design and the art of css and shouldn’t be arguing for unfettered access to a process you don’t understand.

Look, its really quite easy. If Matt and his supporters on this ever do try to push this idea it will blow up in their faces. Remember what you said about companies and corporation using Wordpress and being free not to distribute their site design? Its false.

If you argue that the CSS is part of the GPL then there is no site in which the design is not being distributed. The CSS is linked to it for full electronic access. I could go to ANY site using Wordpress and access its linked CSS file and rip it to my hearts content (but remember by your argument it isn’t ripping its me accessing a legitimately GPL design). Within a few months there would not be one unique designed wordpress design on the web.

I’d give it a few years for most serious businesses to abandon wordpress as a viable business communication tool. Most that I know take a dim view of being unable to protect their unique look in the marketplace.

There is one more issue I’d address before closing out this exchange if you don’t mind and thats why designers aren’t voiolating any community concepts by retaining their copyright to a design.