British Government Caught Pirating On Prime Minister’s Website

[Quote:]

top gearThe issue of copyright is a hot one in the UK right now and the government isn’t scared of getting involved. It has been putting huge amounts of pressure on ISPs to take action against alleged music file-sharers, so imagine, if you will, the beautiful crimson color Prime Minister Brown’s face will turn today when he is declared a pirate too.

Amongst other things, Anthony from antbag.com makes WordPress themes - he gives them away for free but if someone wants to donate, they can. His work is released under Creative Commons 3.0 license, which means that if someone wants to use a theme ‘as is’ or modified in some way, they are required to credit him. A link in the footer of every theme he creates points back to Anthony’s site - this is the minimum attribution he expects, which is pretty damn reasonable.

So imagine Anthony’s surprise when he discovered that his NetWorker theme for WordPress had been used by the British government without honoring the Creative Commons license. The theme has been heavily modified, including the removal of all links back to his site, but Anthony has been able to verify from the source files that Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s own website is in fact built on NetWorker.

It is clear that Brown’s site indeed uses the Anthony’s theme - violating the Creative Commons license. Not only was the link to the the original removed, Brown’s site should have also made their version available under a similar license - share alike.

One Response to “British Government Caught Pirating On Prime Minister’s Website”

  1. dave smith Says:

    Your article is factually incorrect, please see: http://www.newmediamaze.com/index.php/antbags-theme-the-facts/ for the facts.

    Here’s a summary:

    1. The only file that was drawn upon from Ant’s theme was the css file. Ant accepts this fact: http://antbag.com/my-regrets-about-the-copyright-dispute/.

    2. Under Ant’s theme license (CCL), there was no requirement to attribute the work to him in the footer.

    3. Under the license, he was correctly attributed in the CSS file that was used.

    4. Therefore we have abided by the license of Ant’s work.

    please correct your article as it makes factually incorrrect statements (easy mistake to make given the nature of the blogosphere) but they unfairly damage my company’s commercial reputation.

    kind regards,

    Dave


indoor-dictatorial