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

Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

wordpress.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 87 posts

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#41

Post by LordAtlas »

FateOfNations wrote: post #26
pluginvulns wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the original source for the claim, which is on Automattic's website: https://automattic.com/2024/10/02/wordpress-trademarks-a-leg... The author is identified as Neil Peretz, who it says is an associate general counsel at Automattic. He says: "The Foundation also licensed the name WordPress to the non-profit WordPress.org, which runs a website that facilitates access to WordPress-related software." A graphic i…

It seems like they used "non-profit" in that sentence to mean: "an undertaking being conducted for a purpose other than making a profit" …rather than… "an organization that has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as being organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes as set forth in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code."

You would think an attorney of all people would be more careful with their words, especially with terms like "non-profit".

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#42

Post by nchmy »

neilperetz wrote: post #36
nchmy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how poorly written that article is (and how he has no control of his client), its not clear that Neil is actually a real lawyer

Despite our sometimes fervent wishes, lawyers don't control clients. We are not puppeteers.

So what you're saying is that you "fervently" think your boss should shut up because he is giving his legal opponent fuel for their case against his extortion and other charges? And that he's making you write things that you don't understand or particularly agree with?

I promise you, your integrity (or at least your license to practice law) are worth more than Matt's sinking ship. I hope you can move on to do something meaningful with you practice

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#43

Post by ThePowerOfFuet »

neilperetz wrote: post #37
DonnieBurger wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take that as a "no." unless proven otherwise.

While I love pronouns, they can lead to misunderstandings if not carefully defined. Above it was written "I'll take that as a 'no'". Could you explain what "that" refers to in your statement. I am asking because, lacking a clear definition of the question, I cannot say whether the answer is Yes, No, or something else.

"that" was referring to your reply to their straightforward yes/no question being anything but.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#44

Post by mthoms »

neilperetz wrote: post #35
jonnypants83 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

come on, Neil... you just published 700 words on the topic. You even made flow charts! Are you now saying you don't actually have a solid understanding of the situation?

Clearly your question is beyond the scope of the article -which means you want more than 700 words. Otherwise you could just read the article.

Neil,

Thanks for participating. I have an honest question:

How do you reconcile your post [0] claiming that Automattic controls all commercial aspects of the trademark with Matt's previous claim that "the most central piece of WordPress’s identity, its name, is now fully independent from any company" and that Automattic had "give[n] up control" of the marks? [1]

[0] https://automattic.com/2024/10/02/wordpress-trademarks-a-leg... [1] https://ma.tt/2010/09/wordpress-trademark/

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#45

Post by FireBeyond »

ankleturtle wrote: post #34
FireBeyond wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wordpress.org isn't a legal entity. It's simply a domain owned by Matt. Automattic's website ( https://automattic.com/2024/10/02/wordpress-trademarks-a-leg... ) says otherwise: > The Foundation also licensed the name WordPress to the non-profit WordPress.org, which runs a website that facilitates access to WordPress-related software.

The article has been updated. > The Foundation also licensed the name to the website WordPress.org, which facilitates widespread access to WordPress-related software at no charge.

Matt is apparently in full-blown CYA mode.

He's far too used to just referring to, and treating, all these entities synonymously, and now that someone is pointing out all these glaring little admissions of exactly that, he is frantically trying to alter the record.

He's obviously paying close attention to HN, even when he's not on a posting binge making things worse. One can only imagine WP Engine's lawfirm is doing the same.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#46

Post by meltdownMatt »

photomatt wrote: post #25
pluginvulns wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the original source for the claim, which is on Automattic's website: https://automattic.com/2024/10/02/wordpress-trademarks-a-leg... The author is identified as Neil Peretz, who it says is an associate general counsel at Automattic. He says: "The Foundation also licensed the name WordPress to the non-profit WordPress.org, which runs a website that facilitates access to WordPress-related software." A graphic i…

Sorry for that error, the post has been updated now.

How about how the non-profit Wordpress Foundation lists the Wordpress Plugins and Themes indexes as Foundation projects, while you maintain that they’re something you personally own, and are openly controlling for the sake of your profit-seeking conflict with WPE?

https://wordpressfoundation.org/projects/

It’s ironic that you make analogies to “getting Al Capone” while you yourself appear to be engaged in a decade-long tax fraud. But like your constant allegations of “astroturfing by WPE” to explain why everybody holds you in contempt, I guess it’s easily explained as narcissistic projection.

It’s not astroturfing. Everybody can read you, Matt. And they don’t like what they see.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#47

Post by neilperetz »

ThePowerOfFuet wrote: post #43
neilperetz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I love pronouns, they can lead to misunderstandings if not carefully defined. Above it was written "I'll take that as a 'no'". Could you explain what "that" refers to in your statement. I am asking because, lacking a clear definition of the question, I cannot say whether the answer is Yes, No, or something else.

"that" was referring to your reply to their straightforward yes/no question being anything but.

So you interpret "is there any part of the Wordpress cluster of organizations that do not ultimately answer to Matt?" as being a YES or NO question?

I interpret it as a request for information about what is Matt's role in the ecosystem and I was gathering information to share about that.

However, if you are not interested in factual information, the answer is: YES, there are various parts of the the Wordpress cluster of organizations that do not ultimately answer to Matt.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#48

Post by neilperetz »

nchmy wrote: post #42
neilperetz wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite our sometimes fervent wishes, lawyers don't control clients. We are not puppeteers.

So what you're saying is that you "fervently" think your boss should shut up because he is giving his legal opponent fuel for their case against his extortion and other charges? And that he's making you write things that you don't understand or particularly agree with? I promise you, your integrity (or at least your license to practice law) are worth more than Matt's sinking ship. I hope you can move on to do somethi…

No, that's not what I am saying. Nice try with the leading question though.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#49

Post by neilperetz »

mthoms wrote: post #44
neilperetz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly your question is beyond the scope of the article -which means you want more than 700 words. Otherwise you could just read the article.

Neil, Thanks for participating. I have an honest question: How do you reconcile your post [0] claiming that Automattic controls all commercial aspects of the trademark with Matt's previous claim that "the most central piece of WordPress’s identity, its name, is now fully independent from any company" and that Automattic had "give[n] up control" of the marks? [1] [0] https://automattic.com/2024/10/02/wordpress-tradema…

I appreciate the question and it deserves a lengthier blog post reply that I will work on and share. In the interim, some brief thoughts on the topic that may be relevant.

The WordPress community operates on an open source, non-commercial basis. The community decides what is included in each release of WordPress, how it's tested, what documentation accompanies it, etc.

Because the WordPress Foundation, not Automattic, owns the WordPress trademarks for non-commercial use, Automattic has no control or veto of what code is stamped with the WordPress label.

By contrast, if Automattic retained non-commercial control over the WordPress trademarks it could refuse to affix the WordPress label to work done by and released by core contributor groups.

In case you are not familiar with how WordPress decisionmaking works: Volunteer contributors self-organize into groups that set their own goals, interface with other groups, allocate resources, plan a schedule, and resolve issues according to a Community Code of Conduct (see https://make.wordpress.org/handbook/community-code-of-conduc...). You can learn about how decisions are made in the WordPress project at https://learn.wordpress.org/course/how-decisions-are-made-in....

I am going to operate under the assumption that others may have similar questions, which is why I think this is a good topic for a blog post.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#50

Post by neilperetz »

NeonNautilus wrote: post #38
neilperetz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly your question is beyond the scope of the article -which means you want more than 700 words. Otherwise you could just read the article.

Did Matt really send you here without even explaining what the conversation was about? And then you didn't even bother to read it for yourself? The article you wrote claims "The Foundation also licensed the name WordPress to the non-profit WordPress.org, which runs a website that facilitates access to WordPress-related software." Matt in his comment claims "All the information in the links you shared is totally wrong…

I believe there was a typo in the post. If you read this thread you'll see a note below from Matt yesterday that the post was corrected.
Post reply on HN