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

Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

automattic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 135 posts

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#121

Post by spython »

FireBeyond wrote: post #75
stego-tech wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly my thinking as well. All this bickering managed to do is convince me to setup my blog on Ghost instead of anything WP-related. Both parties seemingly suck, and I wish them both the worst. In the meantime, this is a great excuse to promote WP-alternatives and improve upon them just in case this whole thing goes completely pear-shaped.

> Both parties seemingly suck What exactly sucks about WPEngine, specifically?

They extract value from an open source project, use the resources/bandwidth of plugin repositories, position(ed) themselves as WordPress affiliated (the branding can easily be understood as WPengine being core WordPress), and contribute nothing back. It is the “socialize the losses, privatize the profits” of open source.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#122

Post by diggan »

nickff wrote: post #30
klelatti wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it the claimed trademark infringement is WPE saying they ‘provide WordPress hosting’. If they are successful can anyone built an opens source hosting business?

I am not sure which way this will go, but WPE's website was using the word "WordPress" in every possible way before they 'cleaned it up' a few days ago. I am not sure whether it was trademark infringement, but they did seem to be leaning heavily on the trademarked term. I compared WPE's website to Dreamhost's (as I am familiar with the latter as a provider of hosting for WordPress-based websites), and the latter used…

> but WPE's website was using the word "WordPress" in every possible way before they 'cleaned it up' a few days ago

https://wpengine.com/ mentions "wordpress" 56 times today.

And here is the website from a month ago: https://web.archive.org/web/20240903110405/https://wpengine...., still 56 times "wordpress" is mentioned.

Looks mostly the same to me, at least compared to a month ago.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#123

Post by FireBeyond »

spython wrote: post #121
FireBeyond wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Both parties seemingly suck What exactly sucks about WPEngine, specifically?

They extract value from an open source project, use the resources/bandwidth of plugin repositories, position(ed) themselves as WordPress affiliated (the branding can easily be understood as WPengine being core WordPress), and contribute nothing back. It is the “socialize the losses, privatize the profits” of open source.

> use the resources/bandwidth of plugin repositories

As does every single other host that offers WordPress, and every user.

> position(ed) themselves as WordPress affiliated (the branding can easily be understood as WPengine being core WordPress)

One: "WP" was explicitly allowed, by WordPress, for use of WordPress. Matt yoinked this after all of this started, in the last two weeks or so. He also tried to make it retroactive.

Two: nominative usage says that if you factually offer WordPress hosting (or MySQL hosting, or whatever), you are allowed to say so. It doesn't mean you are maliciously "positioning yourself" as "affiliated", in any way, shape or form.

> and contribute nothing back

Not true at all, despite Matt's venom. They contribute and maintain several of the most popular plugins, they contribute to the codebase (just not to Matt's liking), and sponsor conferences and community events - this all started around the time that they sponsored a WordPress conference to the tune of $75,000 and then were banned from attending it, which is odd, because supposedly WordPress (the open source project) and the Foundation are independent (per all of their own filings with regulatory bodies and the IRS), but they were banned because they were in a dispute with Automattic (CEO - Matt), so WordPress Foundation (President - Matt) decided so. To add insult to injury, banned, but they decided to keep the sponsorship money.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#125

Post by mthoms »

skmurphy wrote: post #107
mthoms wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have sites on WPE and I've worked for a major WP plugin developer. I've been in and out of the community since 2010. I know the players pretty well. Matt has sabotaged any chance of a good result for him and Automattic no matter how good this lawyer is. And even if he wins in court he's already lost in the court of public opinion. Its over.

We have been using and building WordPress sites since 2006. I have no experience with WP Engine but I bear them no ill will. I think the "court of public opinion" is very difficult to assess and dominant players can take a very very long time to die. Matt may need to step down if your assessment is correct but that's distinct from what happens to Word Press as a platform. My sense is that the Word Press negotiating p…

I generally agree except for "the court of public opinion" part. It seems abundantly clear to me that Matt has damaged his name beyond repair.

As I see it, the only way for WordPress to survive is if Matt steps down from the board, and the foundation & dot org mess is reorganized in a manner that makes it accountable to the community. Even then, a lot of damage has been done to the reputation of WordPress.

I won't be surprised if we eventually start seeing mainstream reporting on this case from the WSJ and NYT. Luckily, it's an election cycle so that might not happen for a while.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#126

Post by skmurphy »

mthoms wrote: post #125
skmurphy wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have been using and building WordPress sites since 2006. I have no experience with WP Engine but I bear them no ill will. I think the "court of public opinion" is very difficult to assess and dominant players can take a very very long time to die. Matt may need to step down if your assessment is correct but that's distinct from what happens to Word Press as a platform. My sense is that the Word Press negotiating p…

I generally agree except for "the court of public opinion" part. It seems abundantly clear to me that Matt has damaged his name beyond repair. As I see it, the only way for WordPress to survive is if Matt steps down from the board, and the foundation & dot org mess is reorganized in a manner that makes it accountable to the community. Even then, a lot of damage has been done to the reputation of WordPress. I won't be…

Reasonable people may differ. We have very different perspectives on the likely evolution of the current situation. I believe Matt will remain CEO and a year from now, the voluntary departure buyouts from WordPress will be viewed in the same way that 37 Signals weathered the buyout departures of some of their staff. See contemporaneous report at https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/basecamp-employees-quit-ce...

Firms that dominate markets enjoy tremendous inertia in customer choice and can take a long time to die--if, in fact, WordPress is dying. The longer-term perspective on what Silver Lake has been doing to profit from open source efforts by Word Press may reach a very different conclusion about Matt's actions than your assessment.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#127

Post by singleshot_ »

FireBeyond wrote: post #119
singleshot_ wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is going to “win.” They’re going to settle. The quality of your lawyer will absolutely, positively influence your pleasure in the settlement. There are facts and law bad enough to overwhelm any lawyer, but usually there’s garbage on either side of the case and each lawyer will be able to use his or her skill to handle the garbage. > There's gotta be a fancy latin-sounding lawyer word for this, right? “America”

WPEngine's goal may be to break Automattic's exclusive, perpetual and irrevocable license on WordPress. That's something I could (especially given his comments) never, ever, ever see Matt conceding, so they may end up going to trial (as part of their lawsuit centers on the self-dealing, inappropriate use of non-profits, etc., and getting judgment there might be the only route to that).

I hear you when you say that stubbornness is a way to get to a judgment. You’re right, but it also takes money and patience. I think this Matt fellow has no patience but I acknowledge he has money. We will see but my gut says settlement in March 2027 after everyone wastes the requisite money on lawyers.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#128

Post by ydlr »

Molitor5901 wrote: post #93

WP Engine should consider challenging the Wordpress Foundation's 501(c)(3) status by filing a complaint with the IRS. IANAL but I have run nonprofits, and they must be very careful about how it interacts with a for profit entity, especially when they share staff. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/How%20to%20Lose%20Your%20Ta...

That seems like it would be terrible for the open source project and anyone that relies on it. I hope both sides of this dispute deescalate things before something like that happens.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#129

Post by satvikpendem »

yawnxyz wrote: post #61
aimazon wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because it's not corpospeak, it's Mattospeak.

Automattic apparently has 1800 employees (LOL). Surprised they don't have a board, HR, comms, and other teams? Also I realized "Matt" is front and center in Automattic so that says a lot

They do have a board, it's just that the board is Matt and his 2 lawyers, lol.

Re: Response to WP Engine’s Lawsuit

#130

Post by Molitor5901 »

ydlr wrote: post #128
Molitor5901 wrote: post #93

WP Engine should consider challenging the Wordpress Foundation's 501(c)(3) status by filing a complaint with the IRS. IANAL but I have run nonprofits, and they must be very careful about how it interacts with a for profit entity, especially when they share staff. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/How%20to%20Lose%20Your%20Ta...

That seems like it would be terrible for the open source project and anyone that relies on it. I hope both sides of this dispute deescalate things before something like that happens.

Maybe not. A stern letter from the IRS might be just the nudge for the Foundation to clarify things, and maybe push Matt to choose one or the other. Few things will scare a nonprofit more than the IRS knocking on the door.
Post reply on HN