WordPress Parent Company Must Stop Blocking WP Engine, Judge Rules (theverge.com) 66
WP Engine just won a preliminary injunction against WordPress.com parent company Automattic. On Tuesday, a California District Court judge ordered Automattic to stop blocking WP Engine's access to WordPress.org resources and interfering with its plugins. From a report: The preliminary injunction comes after WP Engine, a third-party WordPress hosting service, filed a lawsuit that accused Automattic and its CEO, Matt Mullenweg, of "multiple forms of immediate irreparable harm." It later asked the court to stop Mullenweg from restricting WP Engine's access to WordPress.org.
Mullenweg waged a public campaign against WP Engine in September, accusing the service of misusing the WordPress trademark and not contributing enough to the WordPress community. After blocking WP Engine from WordPress.org's servers, Automattic took control of WP Engine's ACF Plugin.
Mullenweg waged a public campaign against WP Engine in September, accusing the service of misusing the WordPress trademark and not contributing enough to the WordPress community. After blocking WP Engine from WordPress.org's servers, Automattic took control of WP Engine's ACF Plugin.
Mystified (Score:3, Funny)
As a long-time Wordpress user and admirer, this really feels like standing in the driveway, watching Mommy and Daddy setting the house on fire and fighting to the bitter end.
Re:Mystified (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah. But don't worry, it will get worse. Automattic will whitelist their addresses on one single t2.nano AWS instance in Sydney, Australia with a 64kb rate limiter.
LOL! (Score:2)
Yeah. But don't worry, it will get worse. Automattic will whitelist their addresses on one single t2.nano AWS instance in Sydney, Australia with a 64kb rate limiter.
That would actually be quite funny. You're probably not the only one to have that idea so it's quite likely that exactly that will happen. ... I'll be following the situation with rising amusement should it go that way. :-)
Re:LOL! (Score:2)
The injunction is quite specific, it requests a restitutio in integrum as of Sep 20th 2024. Automattic would have to prove that prior to Sep 20th 2024, there was only access to the t2.nano AWS instance in Sydney, Australia for WP Engine to be considered compliant.
Re:LOL! (Score:3)
Judges tend to frown on playing games with their lawful orders.
Re: LOL! (Score:2)
I tend to frown on judges making orders that they think are lawful.
Re: LOL! (Score:2)
Re: LOL! (Score:2)
I tend to frown on judges making orders that they think are lawful.
Names?
Re: LOL! (Score:2)
I expect judges to only "make orders" that they think are lawful.
Do you want judges to "make orders" they think are unlawful?
Re:Mystified (Score:3)
There's nothing judges love more than malicious compliance. They will definitely see in favour of Automatic and laugh it all off during the case.
Sidenote can I employ you for some legal advice? You sound really cheap!
Re:Mystified (Score:0)
and you dont have a funny bone in your body!
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Thank god I only have "normal" bones. If yours are funny you should get them checked.
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Automattic will whitelist their addresses on one single t2.nano AWS instance in Sydney, Australia with a 64kb rate limiter.
Not unless Matt is prepared to pay fines and possibly serve jail time.
Generally speaking "smart aleck tricks" in attempt to circumvent a court order can give rise to a criminal contempt charge
Just change the license going forward (Score:2)
Add a clause that "use of abc.org's servers in excess of 25GB per day must be done under a separate paid license".
Re:Just change the license going forward (Score:2)
Add a clause that "use of abc.org's servers in excess
Wordpress is licensed under the GPL, and custom clauses can't be added to the GPL.
Imposing a download limit would require a ToS on the website itself, which can only be enforced if you Require every user of the website to confirm agreement and sign-up for some type of account in order to identify each separate person you have an agreement with and track the usage towards that user's 25 GB limit.
The limit could not be enforced per network or per IP Address, since the IP Address owner would not be a party to the customer's agreement, and you would end up violating the court Injunction; which can carry criminal penalties such as jail time, or daily fines which can include punitive damages and court sanctions, which might result in losing the ability to defend the case, and therefore losing the ability to win against WPE's claims: For example: $10,000 per day fine for every day you remain non-compliant with the order. Non-compliant parties to the case can also be sanctioned with preclusion of issues, suspension of the defendant's ability to defend or respond to the action against them; preclusion of claims or defenses; preclusions of evidence, Or even the entry of default judgement in favor of the plaintiff, etc.
This probably would not be a problem for WordPress Engine, because each of their web hosting customers is an independent and separate user of the Wordpress software, and each customer would simply need to Sign-up for their own account with download access.
The problem is this would become inconvenient for Wordpress users, since download is now extra cumbersome, And some change would be required to the Automatic update system to allow users of the software to specify their download credentials.
Re:Mystified (Score:3)
As a long-time Wordpress user and admirer
Weird way to feel about the most infectious quagmire of garbage sites playing host to all manner of botnets and malware-laden plugins out there.
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Indeed. What is there to admire about Wordpress?
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
as a long time WordPress user and supporter, this feels like watching the parents put the kids to work in the fields while the parents are busy living it up, we provide the free content while they suck up all the advertising revenue generated
wordpress.com and adsense are basically scams that grossly under pay people and with their $100 threshold for first payout, they are unfairly and deliberately sitting on billions of users income
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Not so much, Automattic is WordPress' mommy and daddy while WPE is pretty much an outside leecher.
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Wordpress was one of the founding investors in WPE, and later sold out.
Re:Mystified (Score:3)
while WPE is pretty much an outside leecher.
Only in the sense that all Wordpress users are leechers and web hosting providers are leechers because Wordpress users hired them to host their website.
WPE is an agent of their customers. Their product is web hosting, and WPE helps their customers implement Wordpress because Wordpress is the tool their hosting customers want for managing their websites.
If Wordpress didn't exist WPE could be hosting Ghost or Grav, Plone, etc.
I would say they are not leechers but typical consumers of open source software. You contribute to the community, and that makes you a participant not a leecher. It is not the job of users of open source software to pay money or anything specific for the development; that is not part of the license terms, And you are not a leecher if you don't pay.
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Yea. Matt's being a real dick about this.
He made open source software using the GNU license. Now, someone leverages WordPress to build a better hosting system than Automattic did, and he's pissed? This would be like Linus Torvolds going after Amazon or Microsoft for using Linux to power their cloud hosting ecosystem.
Wordpress.org also added a checkbox to their login screen that says "I'm not affiliated with WPEngine in anyway" or something similar.
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
I don't know. If I had a popular open source project that someone else also made a successful business out of, I wouldn't begrudge them the success, but I also would feel like I needed to *help* them by donating my company's server resources and bandwidth to them.
Why is it so hard for WPE to just alter the source to make these calls to their own servers instead of to WordPress.org's servers?
Re:Mystified (Score:2)
Why is it so hard for WPE to just alter the source to make these calls to their own servers instead of to WordPress.org's servers?
There's this:
This is because the standard WordPress[General Public License] core software “hard codes” thewordpress.org update site into every WordPress website, rather than making the update site a configurable option for each user.
Not that it matters. Blocking WPE wasn't about that, or trademark, or anything other other than some petty wannabe dictator is upset that they dropped the 'keep every edit by default' misfeature.
WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:-1, Troll)
... but Matt didn't handle it very elegantly. Which he completely admits to, btw.
WP Engine is in trademark violation and has deliberately attempted to mislead customers about the origins and herald of both WordPress and WooCommerce.
They have since changed Branding and wording on their websites, but Automattic has a reasonably solid case.
WordPress.org and the WordPress foundation can change their terms of service in 5 minutes and block WP engine from using their infrastructure once again. This injunction could last less than a week.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
This injunction could last less than a week.
I've never heard of a judge rendering a verdict in less than a week, much less a legal case getting closed out. This injunction will last as long as the case is ongoing. That's the whole point of an injunction.
Ok, phrasing, I get it ... (Score:2)
The effects of the injunction could last less than a week. That's what I meant.
Re:Ok, phrasing, I get it ... (Score:2)
And the judge can haul the executives who ordered that into court for a contempt hearing. Judges do not like malicious compliance, and even without a contempt hearing, at best their lawyer is going to find it difficult to get any leeway from the judge for the rest of the trial. This tactic would not work out well for them.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
WP Engine is not a fair contributor to the community, they make one plugin, Advanced Custom Forms, which is a hook to their paid Pro version and have a lucrative web hosting business.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:1)
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
There's also nothing in the license that says you have to offer the source via the internet at all. You just have to make it available at cost, and you could charge them for CD's with the update source on it. There's also nothing saying you have to offer any services. It's supposed to be a two way street. You don't have to make it easier for them to be leaches.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
I read that WP Engine is the largest sponsor of WordCamp, aside from organizing De{code}.
The first event is fairly accessible thanks to their financial support, while their own event is free.
So, while they may not be a big code contributor, they definitely contribute a lot for the community.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
WP Engine is not a fair contributor to the community
Maybe not a "fair contributor", but they do contribute to the community by offering a paid product that enhances the software.
Contribution to the community is not defined as giving freebies to users, nor as donating money to the devs.
Anyway.. Is there any reasonable explanation as to why WPE is being treated disparately from other hosting providers OTHER than Matt sees them as a competitive threat to their own hosting service?
For example: Digital Ocean, Siteground, Linode, Hostinger, Bluehost, Gater hosting, GoDaddy, Vultr, Amazon EC2 VPS users, etc, are not blocked from accessing Automaticc servers, as far as I know. Some of these would install Wordpress for you just like WPE would, etc.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:1)
WP Engine is in trademark violation
WordPress.com has a trademark on "WP"?
WordPress.org and the WordPress foundation can change their terms of service in 5 minutes and block WP engine from using their infrastructure once again.
Judges love it when you do an end run around their intent.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
WP Engine is in trademark violation
That's for the court to decide anyway. There is a counterargument.. The name "Wordpress" is descriptive of what the product actually does And non-creative, and therefore cannot actually be trademarked, even though the Trademark office issued a registration in error, for example. WPE can potentially come up with any number of arguments that put them not in violation.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
The name "Wordpress" is descriptive of what the product actually does
Ah, so it's software for literally pushing words onto things? It's a novel combination of two words. Nothing like Microsoft trademarking "Windows" and pretending that wasn't what windowing systems called an app's screen frame before they released their OS. But you're right that there is enough legal argument that it has to play out in court before you can actually say anything for sure.
I think it's totally reasonable to think WP Engine's name is not in violation just because WP is not a name that WordPress was using. It's an indirect reference to the name and used to imply compatibility, which is a fair use argument anyway.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
I think it's totally reasonable to think WP Engine's name is not in violation just because WP is not a name that WordPress was using.
Yes; there is no way a trademark registration for "Wordpress" covers the name WP.
And companies have the right to use a trademark nominatively. For example, Microsoft sells you a copy of Windows or a Windows surface.. You are allowed to resale the goods later as a middleman or in the aftermarket and use the name Windows nominatively to refer to the good when you are reselling it: Computer for sale with Microsoft Windows installed. If you created a piece of software that runs on Windows such as "Python for Windows", and you had the rights to use the name Python the Trademark owner for "Windows" has no authority to stop you using the name Windows in your product.
Similarly: If you are in the Tech support business and you sell IT services for Windows machines. You can use the name for the good that you provide service for in your advertisement. For example: "Veeam backup service and security for Office365", "Hosted Exchange", "Dell PC Repair". Once again; Dell nor any Trademark owner has the authority to stop anybody from using a mark to truthfully reference a Good the mark holder has sold, which you are offering service for.
It seems like even a product by WP Engine titled "Managed Wordpress" would be the same. Nominative use of the name Wordpress. Since the software is entitled Wordpress; Any company hosting Wordpress would be able to use the name Wordpress in order to accurately describe their services.
One thing for sure: is if the developer of software wishes to sell services as well, for example "Wordpress Hosting", then they should have an additional Trademark for their service separate from the name of the Software good. In case the holder of the trademark such as Wordpress actively causes confusion by not separating the name of their software from the name of their hosting service, then they should be liable for the dilution of their own trademark.
Nothing like Microsoft trademarking "Windows" and pretending that wasn't what windowing systems called an app's screen frame
Windows is a dictionary word. Microsoft has essentially no protection over the name Windows, unless you use the name and Windows Logo or specifically imply that your product is endorsed by Microsoft. Well, in theory. In reality there are corrupt judges; also billion dollar companies can be sure to hire the lawyers who have deep connections with all judges in various jurisdictions and make sure to file their cases in the right district and get them in front of the right judge to draw matters out until you give up.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
It seems like even a product by WP Engine titled "Managed Wordpress" would be the same
This, yes.
But if they named themselves WordPress Engine as the company name it would imply a relationship that isn't there and create confusion. Probably wouldn't survive a lawsuit.
Windows is a dictionary word. Microsoft has essentially no protection over the name Windows,
This is true for Windows because the name directly relates to its function. Apple is also in a dictionary but it can be trademarked within the domain of computers easily. That trademark does not extend into music without reaching a deal with the already existing Apple Records.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
But if they named themselves WordPress Engine as the company name it would imply a relationship
I suppose it could if they did, since the name Engine would suggest their product is a core component, and WordPress itself is thought of as an engine..
What may muddy the waters further it seems the Wordpress Foundation has recently applied for "Managed Wordpress [uspto.gov]" as a trademark within the past 3 months - specifically within the area of hosting services; which is in a Pending not yet examined status. So anyway, registration could possibly fail since the mark is a generic description of Wordpress hosting.
The application looks like a targeted attempt to bolster claims against WPE, and WP might also file an opposition to the registration preventing it from going into affect. I mean they have long had a service titled "Managed Wordpress Hosting [wpengine.com]", which appeared to be the thing Automattic had been raising a stink about.
Re:WP Engine is a problem ... (Score:2)
the Wordpress Foundation has recently applied for "Managed Wordpress [uspto.gov]" as a trademark within the past 3 months
That should fail. I agree it's just a sham registration to go after competitors.
Please kindly remove Wordpress control from Matt. (Score:1)
Give the control of Wordpress to a real non-profit organisation that will not try to blackmail it's partners because they are too successful, while faking a hypocrite "open" eco-system that welcome everyone, unless of course, again you are too successful.
Just like a drug king pin, Matt is expecting business that use their eco-system and by the same time promote it, to pay him some sort of "success-tax"... if you're too big, at his convenance on his terms.
What in the actual extremist and left socialism fuck is going on here ? I seriously hope that WP Engine come up with their own OPEN PRESS base or something, and make it clear from the day of it creation, that they are not going to become total POS to their community by targeting and blackmailing partner and business that thrive and develop websites and experiences through their system.
You're already a tale of the past if your only answer to businesses challenges like this is to act like a childish losers who envy others instead of keeping the innovation up to par, and try to fuck up everyone by being a cry baby.
We have someone on the WP throne, and he has become a nuisance that need to be removed and changed, you may not agree, but that my opinion.
Re:Please kindly remove Wordpress control from Mat (Score:2)
Re:Please kindly remove Wordpress control from Mat (Score:1)
Re:Please kindly remove Wordpress control from Mat (Score:1)
They kind of are mutually exclusive. At least in terms of Socialism's definition and origins. That doesn't mean there aren't people who use the word "socialist" to describe themselves, but don't meet the definition.
Socialism is social ownership of the means of production. It literally means that no individual can own a business or product, but that they must share any and all ownership with those around them. i.e. There is no person at a company who gets to have all the power, and that social owners (whether that be the employees or community owners) decide the pay scale. The person in a top hierarchical role can't give themselves a raise. Socialists, by definition, want others to succeed, even if it means sacrificing their own wealth.
When someone claims to be a socialist, but grabs power and uses it to enrich themselves, they're not being a socialist. They're being an autocrat.
Re:Please kindly remove Wordpress control from Mat (Score:1)
Thank for your objective and constructive reply, and you're probably right on the autocrat part.
I am still wondering what if that someone is a non-profit fondation that has a claim: "WordPress Foundation is a non-profit organization that was set up to support the WordPress project.[149][150][151] The purpose of the organization is to guarantee open access to WordPress's software projects forever." but then start a world wide drama because they are not getting enough "PROFIT" from those who do succeed because they can't grow their own organisation like some sort of Google from the year 2000 in a sustainable grow manner instead of just keeping a float without necessary "growing" like a profit business ? We all get it, Wordpress has cost to develop and maintain, some C-LAMP stack, bandwidth, etc,
In all seriousness, I feel that socialism or autocrat, by definition apply to a government ? Does it would also apply to a individual or non-profit organisation such as Matt or Automattic who has power ? Shouldn't we have some sort of legal system in place that where whenever you put an project online under the "free open-source" branding/licensing, that project become a "collective property / goods", and that possible destitution options are possible to protect the very existence of the project if at a later time, the current CEO/manager turn rogue like Matt ?
My problem ISN'T that matt want more money... neither the need of, if there is really one.. (I doubt it). The problem is in the way he doing it ! That extorsion, discrimination (cherry picking instead of asking everyone a base price or whatever) and brute force in term of financing a project, and it is being hypocrite to the true nature of free open source. Why the need to "tax" those who use it, and not everyone in a equal manner, but targeting and discriminatively cherry picking who and who , when it was supposed to be a collective work of users that others can use and capitalize on without the fear of exactly this happening ?
If we can't get back the control on, and the guarantee that this will never happen again, we need someone to fork Word Press into something that will REALLY free to use, FOREVER, for everyone such as individual and businesses, SMALL or BIG, so that it is inviting for all the developers around the world to work on it's eco-system, themes and plugins and feel safe to do so.
What we don't need, is to be part of a cult like groupies to please the quirks of one crazy guy.
Imagine if by a pure fictive and unlikely example, the developers of CURL decided one day that *INSERT ONE RANDOM FORTUNE 500 COMPANY NAME HERE* doesn't finance them enough, so they will stop providing access to their code repository in retaliation, discriminatively. Aside from a law suit, what do you think it would happen here ? People would move to another free software or make their own ? fork ? Why aren't we having the same reaction with Word Press ? Because it is a "web software" ?
Thank for your time :)
Whoa, dude, chill. (Score:2)
Matt himself admitted that he screwed the PR-pooch when he snapped earlier this year. He apologized and he promised to
a) call good friends and friendly industry experts before he does anything krass in the future
b) clear up the confusion about pursuit of trademark violations and make good with the community
c) stand back and have his/Automattics lawyers take care of the whole WP Engine problem/mess
Here are some very in-depth long-form talks where the FOSS community asks some tough questions, puts him through the wringer and points out some tear and wear in his arguments. Good stuff. Matt handles it like a grown-up.
He botched a PR communication thing because he let his feelings get the better of him. He will watch out in the future. IMHO he's acquitted.
https://youtu.be/OUJgahHjAKU [youtu.be]
https://youtu.be/WU3sd1kDFLg [youtu.be]
Don't use Wordpress, use Drupal instead... (Score:5, Interesting)
...you'll never outgrow Drupal. That's why so many government websites are built using Drupal [drupal.org]. CNN, NYSE, Reuters, and a lot of Universities also use Drupal.
Drupal is truly open-source, along with all the modules contributed to drupal.org which are easily installable and managed with a command line or scripts. Everything is hosted on gitlab.com and nothing is going away or will be denied to anyone.
The open-source Drupal community is inclusive and supportive.
The new Drupal CMS initiative [drupal.org] has been a year-long effort to make Drupal much more user-friendly to new users, (in competition to Wordpress). Drupal CMS was formerly known by its code name, Drupal Starshot. Drupal CMS has no direct impact on Drupal core development, while offering many different recipes that can be applied over an existing website [drupal.org].
Drupal has an actual Security Team [drupal.org] that works well [drupal.org].
Re:Don't use Wordpress, use Drupal instead... (Score:1)
Re:Don't use Wordpress, use Drupal instead... (Score:2)
The current state is still as it was - WordPress is still easier for a brochure site. BUT... Drupal CMS (formerly known as Starshot) is Drupal's first bonified attempt to take a huge leap ahead of WordPress in terms of usability through a better UX and, more importantly, a built-in AI system to help build sites. As of this fall, the early models/examples were impressive enough for the smarter, lower-tier Drupal "developers" (aka site builders experienced with Drupal's current UI but don't touch code) to consider brushing up their resumes or learn some new skills.
Re:Don't use Wordpress, use Drupal instead... (Score:5, Informative)
Prelude: I was a Drupal maintainer [drupal.org]. My contributions include many contrib modules, as well as some core features (e.g. maintenance mode, watchdog API, syslog module, ...). Some of my contributed modules (Nagios) were in use at the White House during the Obama administration.
I agree with what you say about Drupal, with some nuance.
Drupal 8+ suitability for your web site depends on your particular case.
If you are a large organization, with a budget for in-house staff or the equivalent contractors/agencies, then by all means: go for it.
On the other hand, if you are a non-profit, or a small to medium business, then the current Drupal is overkill. Instead, use Backdrop CMS [backdropcms.org], which is a fork of the most popular version ever of Drupal, 7.x. It is faster, simpler, easier to maintain, while still being customizable, and having a wide range of contributed modules.
Re:Don't use Wordpress, use Drupal instead... (Score:2)
+1 on BackdropCMS. The Drupal community really should've been better about promoting their forking Drupal cousin as an alternative to those who didn't have Drupal expertise available, but that's old news.
Dear Automattic; (Score:2)
Please, quietly, make a resale agreement with WPEngine. Resell their services under your name, branding it and taking a healthy skim off the top.
Set up a seperate corporate entitry to do this. Use the profit to further enhance your core products and satisfy your desires as much as it can.
Do not let us know this has happened until you've got it working right.
Sincerely,
All WP users who swear a pox on you for being such children.
Malicious compliance (Score:3)
Unblock access but rate limit it to 5kbps per connection with a total of 100 simultaneous connections....
Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
I get that much of the time a preliminary injunction is not a final permanent ruling but just a "hold" on an issue while the court case addresses the conflict and decides what the permanent ruling will be.
Still, the principle behind this is something I just can't reconcile with the facts of reality. From what I understand, WordPress.org is offering a service and that service is taking a massive thrashing from WP Engine to the point where WordPress (rightly or wrongly) considers it to be abusive.
Now the courts have just issued an order compelling WordPress.org to continue offering this service to their abuser free of charge?
It doesn't even matter to me whether WordPress is in the right or wrong here. Maybe they're unfairly discriminating against WP Engine who has done nothing wrong. But from what I understand, discrimination is only a crime in the USA if you are discriminating based on certain protected classes such as religion, race, gender etc.
I mean, imagine you own a restaraunt and some rude asshole comes in and starts disrupting your customers, it's within your right to kick them out, ban them permanently from your property and refuse service in perpetuity. That's not unlawful discrimination. It is your right as a business and property owner.
If I owned WordPress.org I would be seriously tempted to just close up shop and walk away out of principle. In the restaurant analogy, if a law were to compel me to accommodate disruptive customers I would quickly adopt the opinion that owning a restaurant is just not something I'm interested in any longer and I would liquidate and walk away.
Beyond unlawful discrimination against protected classes, you have no duty to provide commercial services to others at your own expense or on their terms. There is no law in the USA that I am aware of that could compel a company to stay in business... such a notion would be absurd.
Will be interesting to see how the court case concludes and what WordPress.org chooses to do regardless of the final ruling.
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
In general you need to learn a lot about the law, but for the point you brought up, see promissory estoppel [wikipedia.org].
It would be better if your analogy of WP Engine being "some rude asshole comes in and starts disrupting your customers" matched any of the facts in the case, including from or claimed by Automattic and Matt Mullenweg. Especially when it does largely match his on the record behavior, a lot of which was cited in the preliminary injunction by the judge.
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
Obviously, you do know more about this than me, but it seems as though this is a step against freedom of association, as guaranteed in the bill of rights. Am I wrong about that?
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Informative)
He now wants to revoke that access, and instead charge people for the right to use it.
This has a name in the law. Promissory Estoppel. If you make a promise, and other people rely on that promise and build a business around it, you don't get to break your promise later, especially not with the explicit purpose of screwing over the people who trusted you.
Matt is being forced to provide services to users because he promised to do so in a legally binding fashion.
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
Absolutely fair - I didn't know about that promise component - I've only been vaguely following the story.
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
This preliminary injunction is a very small "step against freedom of association" compared to the many that started in the 1950s. Take your restaurant analogy and add that the "abusive" customer is black. It should be very clear the legitimacy of your removing him hinges on his genuinely being abusive, and saying it was because he accepted private equity would not fly, especially since you have from BlackRock. The judge and her clerks covered this [courtlistener.com] e.g. in the Balance of Equities section:
See also the following Public Interest section, one of four "prongs" which per Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. must be satisfied to grant a PI. Matt's supply chain attack on ACF hit its 2 million users, and the judged cited a "WPEngine customer explaining that the ACF plugin takeover caused a day of unexpected work and stating that '[n]ow [his] clients are feeling the results of this mess too, as their websites are directly affected.'"
If you claim you run 40% of the world's websites and you hardcode "your personal website" into it day to day functioning, your promises have serious weight. See my Wikipedia link above for one of the legal principles in play.
Your suggested remedy, "If I owned WordPress.org I would be seriously tempted to just close up shop and walk away out of principle." would have avoided this mess with WP Engine if done at the beginning, although I don't know if he'd be in jeopardy of losing a class action suit by the entire community who depended on his decades of promises. Easily avoided by handing his "personal website" to some entity he's not involved with, just closing it out of spite would harm many unrelated people.
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
I'm not the person who provided that example, but I appreciate the response regardless. I was just asking how this applies to Freedom of Association - constitutionally, the right to choose how and with whom to associate. There are certainly exceptions in place having to do with not discriminating based on inalienable characteristics, but I can't imagine generally requiring association between two entities based on a "business need"; the promise element is valid and, as someone who has only vaguely been following this mess, I hadn't seen that this was what the complaint was about.
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
From what I can see, the original promise, as stated below (thanks garrett_spencley) didn't include access to WP.Org resources, simply to the trademark and identity. How does that relate to accessing WP.Org resources?
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
because he promised to do so in a legally binding fashion.
This is the part that I need clarification on.
So I found the actual complaint: https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Complaint-WP-Engine-v-Automattic-et-al.pdf
In 2010, in response to mounting public concern, the
WordPress source code and trademarks were placed into the nonprofit WordPress Foundation
(which Mullenweg created), with Mullenweg and Automattic making sweeping promises of open
access for all: “Automattic has transferred the WordPress trademark to the WordPress
Foundation, the nonprofit dedicated to promoting and ensuring access to WordPress and related
open source projects in perpetuity. This means that the most central piece of WordPress’s identity,
its name, is now fully independent from any company.” Mullenweg and Automattic reiterated this
promise later, in even more forceful terms: “What’s important is that [] longer than I’m alive,
longer than Automattic is alive, longer than any of us are alive, there is something that holds the
WordPress code and trademark for the free access for the world.”
(bolded text is bold in the complaint)
Furthermore, I found an following article that seeks to explain Promissory Estoppel. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/promissory_estoppel.asp
It states that the four following criteria need to be met:
1. The promisor made a promise, with the intention that a reasonable person would act on it;
2. The promisee believed the promisor, and acted on that promise in good faith;
3. The promisor later reneged on that promise causing financial harm to the promisee; and
4. The nature of the promise is such that the only way to avoid injustice is by enforcing the promise.
1. What action here did WordPress believe that WP Engine would undertake as a result of this promise? I was going to ask you what specific promises were made in 2010, but I don't have to because the relevant parts are verbatim in the complaint. And while this is just a complaint, and the full facts will come out in litigation, I don't read anything about access to wordpress.org in that "promise." It also seems to me like an INSANE stretch to believe that the INTENT of this promise was that businesses would act by coupling their business model to wordpress.org web servers specifically, or that the promise is to maintain those web servers in perpetuity.
2. Before I read the complaint, I was going to cede that this criteria has been met. But upon actually reading WP Engine's complaint, I think they convinced me that they have not met this criteria. Because the "acted upon in good faith", according to what they claim that "promise" was, would be acting under the belief that WordPress IP was transferred from Automatic to Word Press Foundation. Not that they would have indefinite free-of-charge access to web servers operated at the expense of others. No reasonable person would believe that if Word Press Foundation were the sole operator of wordpress.org that they would never place access restrictions and limitations around their services.
3. The complaint seems to be centred around the claim that Automatic did not, in fact, transfer WordPress' IP to Word Press Foundation. They may have reneged on that promise, and WP Engine will certainly be able to argue that. But the injunction that we're talking about, specifically, is preventing WordPress.org from blocking WP Engine's access to their web servers free of charge. The complaint itself might not be moving the goal post, but seeking that injunction seems to be twisting the facts of this case for PR purposes. No one is actually arguing that WordPress and its related IP should or shouldn't be in the hands of Word Press Foundation. What we're arguing is that no one should be compelled to provide web services free of charge indefinitely. And if the argument agains
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Not in the least true, and it's hard to believe you read and understood the complaint when you missed things like attempted extortion, which in the hearing WPE's lawyers believed was their strongest claim, or tortuious interference, which the judge believed was the strongest as a matter of law since there are complexities in California's laws against extortion, and is what she went with in the preliminary injunction order as a claim WPE was likely to succeed in.
Or the felonious violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) done to the 2 million users of the ACF plugin. There's even more in their amended complaint, you should be looking a CourtListener [courtlistener.com] for a free version of the official record.
The IP transfer you refer to just helps establish Matt has not been dealing with the whole WordPress community in good faith. What you think and believe the original complaint "seems" to say doesn't matter in the least when you're not at all tracking what's going on.
Not what this is about (Score:3)
That is NOT what is happening. Matt Mullenweg runs both Automattic and WordPress.org. Matt has been on a tear in the last few months complaining that WP Engine doesn't "pay their fair share." WordPress is set up to use WordPress.org as its directory for plugins, security updates, etc. When WP Engine refused to pay up what he felt was their "fair share," he cut off access to WordPress.org.
Re:Not what this is about (Score:2)
Why doesn't WP Engine just alter the source of WP to point to their own servers?
It seems rather shitty practice to rely on a competitor for core functionality of your product without compensation.
Divorce Court: Automattic vs. WP Engine (Score:2)
Automattic and WP Engine are like two spouses in a messy, toxic marriage. Automattic has been holding the family together—managing the household, keeping the lights on, and nurturing the open-source community. Meanwhile, WP Engine, the opportunistic spouse, has been benefiting from Automattic’s hard work, leaning on the WordPress platform to build its success but not pitching in nearly as much to keep things running smoothly.
Now, Automattic has reached its breaking point. The accusations are flying: WP Engine is misusing the WordPress trademark, undermining community trust, and profiting handsomely off shared resources without doing its fair share of the chores. WP Engine, of course, denies all wrongdoing, claiming it’s just running its business and providing value to its customers. The courtroom becomes the stage where these grievances are laid bare for all to see.
And who suffers the most in this public spectacle? The WordPress community—the developers, small businesses, and creators who rely on this platform to make a living. They’re the children in this messy divorce, forced to watch their parents tear each other apart while the ecosystem they depend on begins to falter under the strain. The trust and collaboration that once made WordPress strong are now collateral damage in a feud driven by egos and corporate interests.
Automattic might feel justified in its actions, and WP Engine may claim innocence, but neither side is blameless in how this affects the people caught in the middle. The open-source ideals that once held this family together seem increasingly like a relic of the past, replaced by disputes over trademarks, contributions, and control.
If this is how the fight starts, how is it going to end? I'm hoping that, at the very least, this ends with the community still standing, rather than being left to pick up the pieces of a once-thriving ecosystem.