Bet you never thought you’d hear that one!
Today Deadline’s Parent Company Sues The Hollywood Reporter’s Parent Company For Copyright Infringement. They posted a link to the complaint and its exhibits. And this is where I sat up and blinked.
See, TVLine uses WordPress. And part of their claim is that their (I assume) home-grown plugin was lifted. Specifically this file: http://www.tvline.com/wp-content/plugins/todaysnews/js/jquery.featuredarticle.js
Now, I’ll totally allow that the site stole the code. But it’s WordPress which means the code is GPL which means … they can. They’re dicks about it, mind you, but they totally can. I’m interested to see how this one plays out.
ETA: By ‘the code’ I mean not JUST that .js file, but the HTML, the specific WordPress calls, etc. THR actually isn’t using WordPress, as it happens.
Comments
9 responses to “PMC Sues THR Over Open Source Code”
Looks like the plugin was done specifically for the site and it is not being distributed. GPL doesn’t apply if the plugin is not distributed.
That piece yes. But some of their code is not 100% their own and some of their home-grown code is lifted from other sources.
(I posted this and ran off to a meeting without proofing and editing. Bad me.)
Unless the JavaScript is derived from and leverages our own JavaScript libraries and APIs, there’s no case at all for it being inherently under the GPL just because the site itself is WordPress.
I made an update to elaborate. Their filing claims that the code (some of which is output by WP on the front end of the site) was also ‘stolen.’
When you get into page 25 of their claim (item #42) it starts to look really weird. They do specify that the js is theirs, home grown entirely (which … it looks really similar to a lot of other sliders I’ve seen). It’s standard elements designed in a very nice way, don’t get me wrong, but they’re making it sound like they invented the jquery slider.
http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/PMC_vs_THR_Complaint110914175112.pdf
Dug out THR’s code:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/js/js_9fdc52f521b34d0a9aee836ac8f2b834.js
Search for “TERMS OF USE – EASING EQUATIONS”
Looks like the source was GPLd somehow.
Once I found a GPL library that I wanted to use on a website for a client publishing closed-source software. I was a bit wary about the viral nature of the GPL, so I actually contacted the legal department of the company that produced the library beforehand.
My concern was over whether or not including a GPL’d JavaScript library on a page rendered by a closed-source CMS would be a problem. The lawyers explained that including the JS file in the page led to it being downloaded by every client that loaded the page and made me a distributor of their system. They weren’t opposed to this, so long as I retained the GPL on their code and applied it to any code I wrote that interacted with their library, loaded their library, or compressed/minified their library before sending it off to the client.
I wasn’t “publicly releasing” any of the code I was writing for the site, but their claim was that any form of source code download (and JS is essentially downloaded as source) counted as distribution.
Of course, Nacin’s point stands.
Unless it leverages WP’s code (which it doesn’t seem to) it’s not WP GPL. However looknig at their code they claimed “Open source under the BSD License” which does make it GPL, just not WordPressy.
My remark about the “WordPress means it GPL” was in reference to the HTML, which TVLine’s directly refs WordPress, and THR’s pings Drupal. Which is also GPL.
That’ll teach me to hit send and run to a meeting before I have a complete thought 🙂 Bad writing on my part!
My point was playing off Nacin’s comment as well, but pulling that BSD comment out of their source leaves them really no leg to stand on. GPL is GPL, no one can “steal” GPL’d code …
I can see a lot of ‘It depends’ on that one, though. I mean, if the BSD license is BS that THR added to CYA, then the claim is invalid and ‘theft’ stands.
Though to a degree I’m thinking ‘Really? This is like suing a newspaper because their newspaper looks like yours.’ I’m really interested to see how this plays out because they’re both using GPL code, but also because layout-theft on this scale is impressive.
THR is 100% guilty of the stolen posts. I’ve watched that happen. They’re totally lifted content. I just don’t know what that falls under in regards to theft.
(Part of me wanted to use as many acronyms and possible!)