Continuing the conversation from: Plugin support and site admin credentials
What I’m still not clear on is what the “ClassicPress research” label actually means.
Defining a project as a “ClassicPress research” project would seem to suggest otherwise.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m happy to take full ownership of the Classic SEO plugin … just as long as I’m not “stealing” it from ClassicPress.
I’d be happy to consider “ClassicPress research” simply as a temporary home while a plugin is being developed with help from the community if that helps (probably not).
What’s the official view?
The official view is that only ClassicPress itself belongs to ClassicPress. Facilities we provide are a matter of courtesy and convenience.
And, just to emphasize, my points before were about the responsibilities of ClassicPress, not about individuals at all (except in so far that they are given any directions by mods with which they should obviously comply). It’s ClassicPress that would have obligations under GDPR, for example.
That’s fine Tim. It’s something that’s been troubling me for some time but I get it now.
I think this bit is a given:
If a developer is creating a plugin or theme and making use of these forums, Slack, CP GitHub repos, etc., they must not do anything while using these facilities that could potentially harm the reputation and integrity of ClassicPress. That includes using these facilities to share sensitive information such as login details.
This is where I needed clarification:
A “ClassicPress research” project is one where the developer is permitted to use ClassicPress facilities to develop the project and to engage with the ClassicPress community. A plugin (or other project) labelled “ClassicPress research” does not mean that it it is owned by ClassicPress and nor does it mean that ClassicPress shall be held liable for any damage caused either by the plugin or by the developer, whatever the intent. Ownership of the plugin remains with the developer.
Does this sound about right?
I would phrase the second paragraph more like this:
A “ClassicPress research” project is one where the developer is permitted to use ClassicPress facilities to develop the project and to engage with the ClassicPress community. The ownership of, and responsibility for, a plugin (or other project) labelled “ClassicPress research” remain with the developer. ClassicPress cannot, therefore, be liable for any damage caused by either the plugin or the developer.
The point is that this goes much further than a disclaimer. No responsibility ever passes to CP, so CP can’t be liable. There is actually no potential liability to disclaim: all we’re doing is making the position clear.
It’s a bit like me owning a car park, where one car hits another vehicle. Unless there’s something deficient about the design of the car park or some directions I gave, that incident is nothing to do with me, so I can’t be held liable for it.
This is an important legal point. In many jurisdictions, limits are placed on what can be disclaimed. But if something never was a person’s or entity’s responsibility in the first place, those limits can’t apply because the person or entity never could be liable anyway.
OK, sounds good to me. I think we needed clarification on “ClassicPress research” and now we have it so thanks for that.