This blog post is off the mark. Matt’s post is pretty clear: https://ma.tt/2016/10/wix-and-the-gpl/
Wix appear to simply be violating WordPress' copyright.
I actually feel like Matt’s edit came across very well. Addressed every point without actually sounding condescending to me, which I feel like is hard on the internet.
Are his assertions correct that if a tool uses a GPL library then the whole tool must be GPL? I thought there are ways to distribute where the GPL portions are isolated.
Yes, using a GPL library requires the entire tool to be GPL’d. If this isn’t the desired behavior, you can use the LGPL.
Some libraries are licensed with the full GPL on purpose, such as GNU Readline. It’s a very useful library, and many software authors have chosen to GPL their entire app rather than find a replacement readline implementation.
Yep, or you can stick the GPL on a program that gets talked to through pipes or network sockets and only open-source that part of your overall product–unless the code is AGPL'ed, which is a whole different kettle of fish as I understand it.
It bugs the hell out of me that people don’t honor these licenses, especially new hackerpreneurs that somehow think that the open source/free software stuff is just whimsy. There’s a reason these things have been done.
Yep, or you can stick the GPL on a program that gets talked to through pipes or network sockets
Bingo! Used that trick for a long time. Didn’t work for high-performance or embedded code so well since computers were too slow. They’re not any more. I’m surprised I didn’t see even more use of this technique out there by proprietary vendors. So far, they’re preferring simply not re-distributing the code while running computations locally in their clouds for extra lockin. That makes sense [for them] too.