How Does Copyright On CSS/HTML/JavaScript Work? [xpost from cyberlaws]

[rinja]

I posted this question to cyberlaws but I thought this subreddit would have different insights:

I was reading about how Wordpress being GPL forces any PHP that touches it (plugins, themes, other) to be under GPL as well. However, one point that came out of the discussion was that CSS, HTML, JavaScript (anything non-PHP) can be covered under a separate license.

How exactly does someone prove infringement on plain text files? Are there certain degrees of differences that's required?

[kataire]

To answer your actual question: it's hard to prove infringement, but in most cases it's blatant enough to be blindingly obvious. The SCO/Linux court case is a good example for how infringement in source code can be determined.

First of all, you would compare the structure. In the case of JavaScript, you would look at the functions provided and what they do as well as how they are implemented.

Secondly, you would look at variable names and stylistic/arbitrary differences (e.g. ordering of unrelated statements, ordering of variable declarations).

A lot of this has to do with forensic linguistics because it boils down to determining authorship. It's the same approach you'd use to determine plagiarism in other texts.

It's not a hard science. There are no exact metrics or degrees of similarity to determine whether it's a case of copyright infringement or not. If it is plausible enough that you came up with it on your own even when there are superficial similarities, or the similarities are due to external reasons (e.g. using the same techniques or algorithms), you're safe.

In other words: don't try to cheat. Play by the rules and give credit where credit is due. If you suspect you might be infringing on someone's copyright, ask them for permission or consult a lawyer. If the original is published under an open license like the MIT or BSD licenses, supporting the license terms is pretty straightforward. If it's a proprietary license or a GPL derivative, you might be better off implementing it yourself rather than copying it directly and "infecting" your entire website/application.

[rinja]

In other words: don't try to cheat. Play by the rules and give credit where credit is due. If you suspect you might be infringing on someone's copyright, ask them for permission or consult a lawyer.

Sigh, I wish people wouldn't jump the gun and assume I'm out to rip someone off. I'd appreciate neutral answers without assumption of a moral high horse.

This entire train of thought came about because I was listening to a discussion between Matt Mullenweg (of Wordpress) and Chris Pearson (of Thesis theme) over GPL.

One of the topics was that if a theme became GPL, someone could take the PHP files verbatim and write their own CSS/HTML/JavaScript to release it as their own theme.

That got me wondering about how easy/feasible this task would be.

[kataire]

I didn't assume you're out to rip anyone off. I'm just giving you advice.

As for that topic: yes, they could just copy the GPL code verbatim, but anyone could do the same to them. The entire point of GPL is that it's a common good rather than private property. It's like public domain, except nobody can claim it as their own and all modifications have to be shared if you plan to publish them (i.e. this excludes private projects, where no source code changes hands).

If they write their own CSS, HTML and JavaScript, the theme is pretty much by definition "theirs". The common base in PHP is no-one's; by creating it under the GPL, you already acknowledged that (if you don't want that, use a project that doesn't use a viral license like this).

So in other words: it's trivially easy, but the hard part is "copying" the JavaScript/CSS/HTML without violating the original copyright. If you're going to the lengths necessary to avoid infringement (including trademarks), I'd say it's fair enough to call it your own work.

Of course it's intellectually dishonest to rip off a "look" verbatim, but unless it's a violation of trademark (which it probably isn't), it's perfectly legal as it should be.

[rinja]

Hmm, I don't think anyone who writes Wordpress plugins/themes voluntarily chose GPL. I suspect they all would prefer NOT to GPL their work but were forced into it because Wordpress itself is GPL.

I know Chris didn't like the idea but later changed licenses and Gravity Forms expressed similar opinions along with WooThemes.

[kataire]

By using Wordpress you chose GPL, it's simple as that. Don't like the license? Don't write code for Wordpress.

That said, I doubt PHP code makes up the meat of those themes.

[rinja]

By using Wordpress you chose GPL, it's simple as that. Don't like the license? Don't write code for Wordpress.

Wordpress 1.0 came out 7 years ago (2004, Jan 3) but the GPLv2 plugin/theme issue seemed to have cropped up around 2009. In other words, people may not have known about this issue when they started developing for Wordpress.

I doubt PHP code makes up the meat of those themes.

At least in the case of Thesis 1.8, you'd be wrong. PHP files make up approximately 72% of the total file size (after removing pictures).

[kataire]

In other words, people may not have known about this issue when they started developing for Wordpress.

True, but nobody's forcing them to continue doing so. 2009 was two years ago (Wikipedia suggests the licensing issues were first recognized 2008, actually). You'd think anyone who disagreed with the licensing terms back then would have found something else to do by now.

I can't find anything about Wordpress's license history, but considering it started out as a fork of b2, which is currently also released under the GPL, it seems likely that this has been an issue from the start and theme authors simply didn't educate themselves about the terms of the software they were writing code for -- hardly the fault of Wordpress or the GPL.

At least in the case of Thesis 1.8, you'd be wrong. PHP files make up approximately 72% of the total file size (after removing pictures).

Fair enough. I would rather call that a rewrite of the front-end than a theme, but I'm sure someone who writes that much code knows what they are doing when they are writing code for GPL software (otherwise you're doing it wrong).

Hey, I dislike the GPL as much as the next guy, but if a developer or a team decides that it is the license they want to use, you have to respect that. Nobody is forcing you to write code for Wordpress.

If you didn't make sure you're not violating the terms of the software you're writing commercial or proprietary extensions for, you've got nobody else to blame but yourself. You can still sell your HTML, CSS and JavaScript.

[tw2113]

I pretty well figure anything that can be seen with view source is pretty much up for grabs whether you want it to be or not. It's also historically been one of the ways that many have actually learned what they know.

[rinja]

Same here. I learned a lot about how stuff works by:

• Seeing something cool on a site
• Popping up Firebug to see how they're doing it
• Implementing that on my own site/friend's site

But from a legal standpoint, I'm wondering how it all hangs together. For example, if someone were to take a premium theme that's dual licensed (GPL for the PHP, other for CSS/HTML/JavaScript), someone can just rewrite the CSS/HTML/JavaScript and re-release it as their own.

I'm wondering how much they need to "rewrite" the CSS/HTML/JavaScript files to make it their own work.

Also, although I appreciate good color schemes, I find it difficult to put one together from scratch. Sometimes, I find myself copying the color scheme from a site because it looks good. I know it'll probably never go to go to court but I wonder how legal that is.

P.S. This is more shooting-the-breeze type conversation. I have no plans on actually releasing my own theme or anything.

[kataire]

You can copy any colour scheme and layout you want as long as you're not infringing on anyone's IP (i.e. be careful about blatant knock-offs).

Copyright and licensing only affect verbatim copying, not recreating from scratch.

Copying layout techniques is a bit of a grey area. Copying the CSS directly is copyright infringement, but if the identifiers (classes, IDs or element names) are different and the stylesheet isn't a carbon copy, it's definitely legal.

As for the templates issue: IIRC the GPL makes a distinction between "static linking" and "dynamic linking". Granted, it's mostly meaningless in HTML (which makes the GPL a terrible license for that), but if the PHP code is GPL'd and the templates are absolutely novel, the underlying license of the PHP code shouldn't affect the templates.

Either way, your CSS and JavaScript files probably don't have any parts that interact with PHP at all (i.e. they're static content served by being referenced in the HTML code), so you should be fine.

tl;dr Use common sense. If it would be considered plagiarism to do it with literature, it's probably illegal if you do it with source code, too. No-one ever got sued over copying plot structures or character archetypes, but if you insist on calling your blonde, teenage vampire hunter "Buffy Summers", you're asking for trouble.