Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

wpengine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 717 posts

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#211

Post by JimDabell »

photomatt wrote: post #176
JimDabell wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 8% is typical for a franchise fee I see many WordPress hosts use these trademarks in the same way WP Engine does. How many of them are paying this typical 8% of monthly revenue fee?

Other hosts have contributed significantly to WordPress.org and Automattic over the years, in a variety of arrangements. None have abused the WordPress and WooCommerce trademark as much as WP Engine has, hence our C&D against them.

I didn’t ask about “a variety of arrangements” though, I asked about the terms you describe as “typical”.

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#212

Post by wattwullenberg »

photomatt wrote: post #84
aimazon wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Thanks, I carry a co2 and carbon monoxide monitor. Co2 where I'm at is 572. I do own a place in Montana, and I meditate several times a day. I have not threatened to take down WordPress.org. WPE's preservation requests do complicate things, legally, though, for the Slack and forums that W.org offers. Both Cloudflare and Fastly have reached out offering CDN services to W.org, which we're considering. Cloudflare also s…

[flagged]

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#213

Post by [deleted] »

safety1st wrote: post #198
photomatt wrote: post #57

Howdy, Matthew Charles Mullenweg from the lawsuit here. One thing I'm surprised they disclosed is on page 35 that Heather Brunner at WP Engine was interviewing for a job at Automattic. That's why we were spending so much time together 1:1 without her team there in the meetings I posted here: https://automattic.com/2024/10/01/wpe-terms/ They lied that it was to run WordPress.com, though, she wanted to be the Executive…

Hi Matt, great that you're participating here and I'm broadly supportive regarding your concerns with the trademark and WP Engine's conduct. However I do not understand why you chose to make 1.5 million enemies in the WordPress community in one weekend by shutting down their ability to update plugins with zero warning and consequently reducing the security of their websites. To be entirely blunt it's all damage contr…

[deleted]

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#215

Post by mysecretaccount »

geerlingguy wrote: post #196
photomatt wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very comfortable with the truth of everything being public, it's on our side. The legal case will drag out for years.

Regardless, I'd take some time and go offline, instead of posting reactionary comments on HN right now.

He seems rather level-headed to me. I would rather a CEO address this lawsuit candidly personally.

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#216

Post by bigiain »

cdolan wrote: post #178
bigiain wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realise just how guilty people sound when complaining about preservation requests for discovery during lawsuits? If you're "right" and "on the side of good and freedom", what are you worried about in Slack/forums/whatever? Because everything made public so far in their filing is pretty fucking bad (for you), I can only assume that discovery is gonna reveal some even worse behaviour on your part - or you'd have…

For you: See paragraphs 32 and 33

Yeah. I foresee a possible hilarious outcome here.

Matt wins this case, having the court determine the trademarks are "worth" so much that WPEngine - one out of thousands of WP hosting companies - owes licence fees of 10mil per year. Lets ballpark that at a billion dollar a year in licence fees worth of revenue, maybe 5 or 10 billion value.

The IRS then steps in and "Al Capones" Matt and Automattic for tax evasion by moving billions of dollars of assets between a non profit and a for profit company without disclosing or paying tax on it. IRS wins punitive damages, wipes out every company asset Matt's ever been involved with.

WPEngine and Silver Lake buy the remains of these companies (including the trademarks) at fire sale prices.

Everybody loses.

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#218

Post by geerlingguy »

jameslk wrote: post #165
fhfhfhjfnfnfmf wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re welcome to your opinion, but my company is in the market for a large enterprise CMS management contract, and this situation has taken every WordPress option off the table due to uncertainty about the business and technical stability of the ecosystem. I highly doubt we’re the only ones feeling that way.

What alternatives is your company considering now, if you don’t mind sharing? Genuine question

Probably Drupal, maybe Joomla, or maybe something more custom if in PHP-land. Otherwise one of the other CMS / DXP platforms (some require eye-watering enterprise budgets): https://cmscritic.com/key-takeaways-from-gartners-2021-magic...

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#219

Post by DannyBee »

caseysoftware wrote: post #188
DannyBee wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lawyer here - we do. For very good reason. A. Legally, it cannot possibly help you (whatever happened, happened). However, it can hurt you (inconsistent statements, etc). This is particularly true in colloquial environments like HN. B. While it may be useful reputation/press wise, because anything you do wil be evidence, you should be having someone else do that. C. If you are part of a publicly traded company, you c…

^ THIS. Not a lawyer but have been at some major companies when legal stuff goes down. Most have told us: "hey, there's a thing going on. Do not talk about it, don't reference it, don't 'correct' people. If anyone asks you for comment, send them to us" I've been deposed and it sucks. It's exceptionally stressful, even if you're not the target in the situation.

Right.

The best case scenario here is that Rachel (or one of her associates more likely) takes every single sentence Matt has written here, or anywhere else, tonight, and cross-checks it against every other sentence or fact he's claimed before. Or that his company has claimed. or the foundation has claimed. or ....

Then at the deposition, they will then ask a lot of hard, uncomfortable questions about every single inconsistency, no matter how little. Because that is what they spend many hours preparing to do.

That's the best case.

Re: Filed: WP Engine Inc. v Automattic Inc. and Matthew Charles Mullenweg [pdf]

#220

Post by 3np »

photomatt wrote: post #150
spellsaidwrong wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question you need to ask yourself is whether you _should_ talk to journalists during a legal matter, instead of trying to fight the court of public opinion.

I'm very comfortable with the truth of everything being public, it's on our side. The legal case will drag out for years.

What I think you don't realize is, the minor discrepancies in statements of facts are inconsequential in the court of opinon. Even if (which TBH don't find implausible at all) everything you said and posted is true and I agree in principle, that doesn't resolve the issues around CoI and they way you have been communicating over the last couple of weeks, including the WPConf bombshell and the abrupt discontinuation of service. The fallout of the drama and the way you have been playing your hand vastly overshadow whatever your motivations for "going nuclear" was.

I don't believe you will gain anyone's sympathy by resolving a misunderstanding about who-said-what-when in some inconsequential matter somehow apparently also part of this drama. Some if it seems like pure distraction that I don't see why anyone outside of the individuals involved should have ever heard about in the first place.

I second the sentiment that you don't appear healthy and could suggest maybe let someone else take a seat in one of the (3? 4?) chairs for a change? At least from the outside, you still seem free to choose your focus yourself. Maybe that window will be closing...

Post reply on HN