Anyone who wants to have a theme hosted in the wp.org repository must maintain at least two degrees of separation from non-100%-GPL themes.

Yet another double standard in the wp.org directory world. Plugin authors can sell non 100% GPL plugins and still host their GPL plugins in the repository. The most noteworthy is of course wp-e-commerce. Is it yet again a fame thing as was the case with Light SEO being pulled and not All In One SEO or is it something else?

I’m unsure if this ban will extend to the free repository if you wanted to release a 100% GPL FREE theme while you also sell dual license commercial themes.

It would appear that anyone who sells non-100%-GPL themes (or promotes, advertises, or links to the same) will have any otherwise-eligible 100%-GPL theme rejected from the wp.org repository.

Anyone who wants to have a theme hosted in the wp.org repository must maintain at least two degrees of separation from non-100%-GPL themes.

So while people can definitely go after copyright infringements, there will still be mass distribution of your work without any compensation.

When did “compensation” enter the discussion?

One way that sharing is legal, the other it’s not. Yes some of it will happen either way but IMO why open the door for the rest?

Ben, I’m not sure I understand your point here? (Maybe I should go make some coffee, and then re-read your comment?)

This is the distribution method that I think makes the most sense for themes. It retains the GPL licensing where it is required while giving theme developers more control over the actual design.

It’s important to note that if you distribute commercial themes this way, you will not be able to be listed on the WordPress.org commercial theme page.

I’m unsure if this ban will extend to the free repository if you wanted to release a 100% GPL FREE theme while you also sell dual license commercial themes.

As you mentioned, trademark infringement is a problem but you can use trademarks when saying “As compared to” like the knockoff brands do in grocery stores.

So while people can definitely go after copyright infringements, there will still be mass distribution of your work without any compensation. One way that sharing is legal, the other it’s not. Yes some of it will happen either way but IMO why open the door for the rest?

The people that are using the half & half model that Jason mentions & I believe ThemeForest uses still can’t be included in the WordPress Theme Directory apparently so why bother with it?

It’s clear no one is going to take you to court on the issue, especially since I believe they’d lose.

It would seem that both Brian Gardner and Jason Schuller have problems regarding the dilution of their trademarks, through bundling, re-selling, and/or malicious modification of their work.

The solution seems to be straightforward: license copyright using the GPL, but fully enforce your trademark rights.

Do you want to exercise your rights under the GPL copyright license to redistribute, modify, and sell my work? Go right ahead.

But if you modify my work in any way, you cannot use my trademark.
If you sell my work, you cannot use my trademark.
If you want to be a real stickler: if you re-distribute my work, you cannot use my trademark.

All of these restrictions are fully in line with trademark law, and do not infringe the user’s rights as granted by the GPL.

I’m really starting to see that all of the Sturm and Drang surrounding GPL has really been misplaced. The real issue is trademark protection, infringement, and enforcement.