Is this not the case?
Regardless, it's impressive.
Is this not the case?
Regardless, it's impressive.
How is taking the HTML for a webpage you've created, replacing the title with <?php the_title(); ?> and putting <?php the_content(); ?> in the content area, a derivative work of the WordPress code base? Yet that's the argument they're making when someone say you're bound by WordPress's license by creating a theme that will work with it.
You can't just throw a license at someone that hasn't agreed to it. It's a completely untested legal theory Matt relies on when he says WP themes have to be GPL. There are lots of people that don't buy it at all, like the creator of Thesis, which is one of the best selling commercial WP themes.
I understand with regards to artwork, but a theme is more than images and CSS.
edit: here's a pretty thorough law-review article: http://web.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/bulr...
The fact that Wordpress delivers the content to the theme is basically irrelevant in my eyes. All the work goes into the design, HTML, CSS and Javascript, and the end product is an original work.