This post is two-fold. The first half is about something that happened a long time ago, but becomes relevant because of the second half.
Themes Changing “Ownership”
I may not be the expert on problogging but acquiring a WordPress theme feels weird. Cutline, created by Chris Pearson, is now being managed by Brian Gardner under Splashpress Media since May 4, 2007.
Imagine a very special theme with carefully planned features and support to speak of despite being completely free of charge, having its own top-level domain blog (but of course, since themes are blogs) and a sizable fanbase. It is so special that it actually gets sold.
In the same way people ask “what does it mean to change management and authorship of a blog?” I also ask, “what does it mean to change management and authorship of a theme?” Most blogs have distinct personalities behind them and when they change ownership, the authors are likely to change as well. The writing style changes, the choice of topics changes, and the overall vibe of the blog changes. Selling a theme seems to be no different. Example: Wisdump, originally the site of Paul Scrivens, is now a group blog also owned by Splashpress Media. More recent examples include the acquisition of Bloggy Network blogs by—you guessed it—Splashpress Media.
I have not heard of themes being purchased before, much less web designs. Selling something I have created and then managed by someone else doesn’t make sense to me. Creative works aren’t commodities that change hands the way coins do. There will always be a single creator—individual or group—and once that creator lets it go, it will still be his own creation.
What if a work can no longer be updated by its creator? And that creator lets that work be improved upon by someone who can? That’s what acquisitions are all about. I guess themes are now entering that category. Anything on the Web straddles the line between irrational art and rational science.
But whether you debate my opinion of a work (especially a virtual one) having a single creator, will people remember that creator of the work in the future?
Eventually, no one will remember that Cutline was made by Chris Pearson. There might even come a time people will forget Brian Gardner for it, too. Does anybody still remember Blogger’s original owner, Pyra? There you go.
Themes With Price Tags
Hypocrisy is what people are calling the WordPress.com theme marketplace idea since Automattic has boycotted sponsored themes since April. But I don’t really care much for WordPress.com since it’s the moneymaking counterpart of the open source blogging software we’ve come to know and love. The theme marketplace will not allow paid links, which is a good sign.
I’m just not sure if it’s worth my time to create a premium theme and give 50% of my revenue to them, whether or not it’s the theme author who sets the price. And requiring a GPL license sort of contradicts the fact that you’re requiring payment for these works. I say sort of because GPL licenses are generally used for free software, but necessarily so.
But I might give it a go just for the heck of it, especially since WordPress itself will be marketing these themes. If this idea works out as well as they hope, this is an opportunity that should not be passed up, as a web designer.
Honestly, the idea doesn’t feel as weird as the Cutline “acquisition”. In the marketplace, it will still be your own theme. Or will it, after it has been bought and modified beyond recognition—for better or worse—like any free theme?
The part of me that’s paying attention to this theme-selling hullabaloo wonders why selling links is considered so unethical that Google’s recent PageRank update has majorly slapped everyone engaged in it, big or small.
(Okay is Stellify the only one whose PR improved this time? Not that it means anything anymore but it actually got a 6, luckier than these guys. Poor currently-abandoned Qwerky went down but I can’t blame anyone Google for that.)
Why? Because links determine online reputation and quality of links determine the strength of that reputation? But aren’t all online ads essentially links? Paid links? (Ignore the nuances of scripts that turn any HTML element into clickable objects that load new pages.) Why won’t Google penalize sites that distract you with all their horrible ads? Which leads me to: shouldn’t Google bother with the main content of the website rather than the ads alongside it? Aren’t we all here to make money? Okay maybe not. Of course, in a perfect world no links would be frauds, nor would they be pawns in the multi-billion dollar advertising industry.
But surely it’s the system that needs to change.
If you don’t already know, I wrote for Splashpress blogs Gadzooki and Blog-Tutorials a few months back. And J. Angelo Racoma, whom I’ve known and collaborated with before he became part of it, is doing a swell job as its editor in chief.
The Cutline sale was effectively sponsoring a theme or buying links through the back door, just the original designer promoted it heavily before selling it on.
It ws also used to promote the Tubetorial site, which was also sold as part of the same deal.
It is a great example of why sponsored themes should be allowed in the theme directory, because there are always back doors which eventually result in the same situation, someone with money ends up with lots of links.
To clarify- we bought Tubetorial & Cutline was just a bonus, being on a sub-domain. So it was never a “Cutline acquisition” as you have reported incorrectly here. Ditto the themes at Devlounge, which we just bought, are just bonuses to the overall package. I don’t think there is anything “weird” here- in what is a free and open marketplace.
As you must know, designers need to be rewarded for their work and that includes post-release support, for which Chris worked very hard at & deserved to be compensated. Is he (or us) then just to trash the theme post-sale?
We have kept Chris’ name on the site as author and even on all new versions, e.g: Brian’s 3 column ones. So again, more wrongful insinuations on your part.
I find your stance on WordPress’ positions to be confused and naive.
Re: PR- if sponsored themes were being punished by Google, why did our own WordPress Themes site get a PR6 out of the box?
Lastly, you should in the spirit of transparency and full disclosure, have revealed that you yourself have worked for Splashpress in the past.
It was still a “changing of hands”. Perhaps the term acquisition was a bit too much on my part, or I should’ve referred to other press releases, but I was just taking a cue from this line:
ia said:
Also, Chris Pearson does deserve to be rewarded for his work—I doubt that the popularity of Cutline wasn’t taken into consideration when you made the sale. And Brian has no fault in this. But who’s to say during the next wave of acquisitions, some other company with lesser morals removes those names or does something just as unethical? I’m sure not one of you would allow that to happen but who knows?
It is all weird because never before have I seen a theme considered viable enough to be acquired by a company, more so for one that has a different manager now. It is the same weirdness I feel about Wisdump and similar personal blogs that have changed.
I totally understand people’s beef with the way things are going down at Automattic. It’s similar to the general fear about Google. But isn’t it all just business, as you said? Care to explain my confusion and naivety further? :)
If sponsored themes aren’t punished by Google, it’s Google that would have the answers. :P
Lastly, I wasn’t concealing anything because I’ve already mentioned that fact in a past post. It was also in the footnote of a previous version of this post but I neglected to keep it there. It’s back.
for the record, this guy up here started the name calling. hahaha. his points sound valid and respectable but the personal criticism diminished his credibility.
It’s understandable that one might get irked by having someone criticize his actions but please, let’s keep this objective.
um. isnt it general practice for someone to pay someone to design their site? i think this is really a natural extension. what is so weird about that?
Web designs are purchased so that they can be used, but they are not normally purchased so that they can be maintained by a new entity for re-use or improved use, the way web applications are being acquired all over the place. It is also weird because it is new—has any other theme been acquired like Cutline? As I’ve said, it’s the same thing with a blog whose initial owner was a single person that gave a distinct personality to it. Because said theme or blog was popular to begin with, they’d like to take advantage ot that popularity if its owner is no longer able to maintain it. Over time, the reputation of that theme or blog becomes a mix of its creator and those who took over it. And that is also weird.
Ia- I appreciate the candid response. Fair point on the disclosure thing- that was just me nit picking anyway.
Re: blogs “with personality” being sold, I get you. Not an easy or a comfortable process. I would like to draw a comparison with the Blog Herald here. It used to be a sole author blog with Duncan Riley and was all about Duncan’s character, and is now a multi-authored blog. Is it any for the worse? It took time to evolve with teething problems, sure. But realistically, could Duncan have continued slogging away every day? Similarly could Chris have carried on supporting Cutline with no end in site? I think that you as a designer and a blogger would realize that at some point you have to take a breather and cash in, and this process is leading towards a different type of blogosphere, but not necessarily a worse one. Just look at a Sitepoint sale in the last couple of days-: blogging fingers selling for its BIN at $6k within 2 hours. A highly personal blog. A year ago this would have been $2k max. and been hard to sell.
I think that the confusion on your part lies in what you say here-:
“But I don’t really care much for WordPress.com since it’s the moneymaking counterpart….”
& here-:
“But I might give it a go just for the heck of it, especially since WordPress itself will be marketing these themes….”
In other words, on the one hand you give Automattic the benefit of the doubt based on its non-commercial nature (the .org side) and then you continue as if awed by their potential commercial pull on the .com side.
The naivety here is that you do not see this as a cynical aim to monopolize the marketplace completely and a move that would do precisely what you fear in this post, in spirit- that is to make the designer purely some factory hand that would soon be forgotten down the road. This is the inherent problem with business as you get big- even with the best intentions in the world, you get pushed into a pressure bubble where you must continue to out-do your competitors at all cost to your original vision. This has without a doubt happened to both Google and Automattic and we have every reason to be wary.
Can I assure you that Splashpress is not this. I am the sole equity holder and I am not selling, nor do I have any grand ambitions to dominate the world!
Thanks for your time and a thought provoking post. How much do you charge for a basic WP design, btw? And why did you stop writing for us?
I do realize the danger in it. That is why I also mentioned “the general fear about Google” in my previous comment. I said I might just try it out because you won’t learn anything properly until you try it out for yourself—mistakes or no mistakes. If there will be tragic news of a theme designer who’s lost his soul because of the marketplace, then I will definitely stay away. :)
In the last (current) WP design I was offered 2 pizzas. ;) I’ll email you the answer to the second question.
Interesting post, and discussion going on here. I actually respect Mark for what Splashpress Media is doing. From what I’ve observed over the past year, he’s had some difficult experiences in some of his purchases, as they have spiralled downwards after the ‘takeover’. However, he has persevered, and hasn’t let the discouragement get to him.
Anyway, no one could really think it odd that SplashPress would want to buy some of the sites they have. It’s more odd that the original owners were willing to sell!
Nice site ia. I haven’t been here before.
[...] While here, check this articleabout the latest WordPress com discussion on selling themes: Selling something I have created and then managed by someone else doesn’t make sense to me. [...]