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

51–60 of 87 posts

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#51

Post by neilperetz »

kinkora wrote: post #30
photomatt wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Thanks for clarifying on that error. I am not involved in the wordpress community in any shape or form but am fairly privy to what it is along with the open source world yet.. even I am finding it hard with confusing and/or conflating statements on what falls under the non-profit, foundation, commercial entity, etc. But even if you ignore random stranger me from the internet, wouldn't it flag something in you that yo…

As I noted above, we are preparing a blog post with further detail about Matt's role in the community. Of course, if that doesn't provide sufficient clarity, let us know.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#52

Post by neilperetz »

mattl wrote: post #14
photomatt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally different. The Foundation has no employees, only volunteers and three board members. (I'm one of them.)

I’d love to see something on the foundation website which explains this. Thanks for your reply.

Indeed, a blog post with more detail is forthcoming.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#53

Post by neilperetz »

pluginvulns wrote: post #40
neilperetz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, it's Neil Peretz. I was just alerted to your post. I understand there's a question you have. How can I help you?

We don't have any questions, but there are possibly several inaccuracies in the post you wrote. At least the information appears to contradict other information provided on your side. The post has been updated to say that "The Foundation also licensed the name to the website WordPress.org, which facilitates widespread access to WordPress-related software at no charge." Websites presumably can't have trademark license…

You wrote: "In explaining how the license agreement between the foundation and Automattic happened, the post says that 'In order to effect a valid license agreement, there needs to be an actual exchange of value from both sides, which lawyers call "consideration."

Indeed. And there was a lot of Consideration given in this exchange. Automattic owned 100% of the WordPress trademarks. Automattic's "Consideration" was to give all the non-commercial use of those trademarks to the WordPress Foundation.

Consider a simple, but apt analogy. You own a car. You decide to give someone else the right to drive your car on the weekends, however you retain the right to drive it during the week. Did you provide Consideration for the right to drive the car during the week? Of course - the recipient previously had nothing and you gave them the right to drive your car on the weekend. The only lack of Consideration here was that the person getting the weekend driving rights gave you nothing in exchange for those.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#54

Post by neilperetz »

LordAtlas wrote: post #41
FateOfNations wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Sorry that even attorneys can have typos.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#55

Post by Ballantara »

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…

he's never going to move on to anything meaningful, he's fully cooked

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#56

Post by meltdownMatt »

neilperetz wrote: post #54
LordAtlas wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Sorry that even attorneys can have typos.

That’s a pretty meaningful mistake, given that the nature of the non-profit entanglement is fundamental to several claims. It seems like you were as confused as the community was, which sure doesn’t help any of Matt’s claims about everything being “open” and “transparent” all along.

Well, I guess this thread answers the question of “how can Matt’s lawyer possibly be encouraging this?”

Penny-wise and pound foolish.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#57

Post by [deleted] »

neilperetz wrote: post #49
mthoms wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[deleted]

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#58

Post by ValentineC »

neilperetz wrote: post #53
pluginvulns wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't have any questions, but there are possibly several inaccuracies in the post you wrote. At least the information appears to contradict other information provided on your side. The post has been updated to say that "The Foundation also licensed the name to the website WordPress.org, which facilitates widespread access to WordPress-related software at no charge." Websites presumably can't have trademark license…

You wrote: "In explaining how the license agreement between the foundation and Automattic happened, the post says that 'In order to effect a valid license agreement, there needs to be an actual exchange of value from both sides, which lawyers call "consideration." Indeed. And there was a lot of Consideration given in this exchange. Automattic owned 100% of the WordPress trademarks. Automattic's "Consideration" was to…

> Indeed. And there was a lot of Consideration given in this exchange. Automattic owned 100% of the WordPress trademarks. Automattic's "Consideration" was to give all the non-commercial use of those trademarks to the WordPress Foundation.

If I understand your comment correctly, you are saying that Automattic is still the owner of the WordPress trademarks, and granted licenses for non-commercial use to the WordPress Foundation?

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#59

Post by mthoms »

neilperetz wrote: post #49
mthoms wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Neil, thanks for your response. But (as you noted) there is still lots of confusion.

>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.

Respectfully, how the "code is stamped" wasn't the question, and nobody was worried about that. What people were worried about around the time of Matt's post (previously linked) was corporate control over the marks. That is the context under which Matt made the claim.

Given that context, would you describe the trademarks as being "fully independent from any company"?

If I may pick your brain some more; Where does this distinction between commercial and non-commercial use come from? The trademark assignment does not appear to make any such distinction: "..an exclusive, fully-paid, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sublicensable right and license to use and otherwise exploit the trademarks...".

https://assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/assignment-tm-4233...

Which brings up something else I hope you can clarify: how can The Foundation grant wordpress.org a license if the licence granted to Automattic is exclusive? Wordpress.org as you know, is not a non-profit.

Thanks.

Re: Mary Hubbard New Executive Director of Wordpress.org

#60

Post by aimazon »

neilperetz wrote: post #49
mthoms wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If the WordPress Foundation is controlled by Matt, Automattic is controlled by Matt and WordPress.org is controlled by Matt, how can there be independent decision making? As Matt has demonstrated by blurring the lines between WordPress.org and Automattic by introducing the ban on WP Engine "affiliates" accessing WordPress.org because of the lawsuit against Automattic, there's no distinction.

Matt has tweeted about his final approval over WordCamp events despite members of the volunteer groups operating under the belief they had the final say, which undermines any attempt to claim these volunteer groups have any control (only the illusion of control): https://x.com/ryancduff/status/1841834672059199590

Automattic just poached Jason Bahl from WPEngine to bring WPGraphQL into core WordPress, demonstrating very clearly that Automattic have control over WordPress core: https://wordpress.org/news/2024/10/wpgraphql/

Matt has shared that he owns WordPress.org personally but that Automattic employs hundreds of people to work on it and spends millions of dollars financing it.

Ultimately, you work for Automattic and report to Matt so you're obligated to share his version of the world, but the version of the world you're describing only exists in Matt's head. There's no way to frame what is happening as independent of Automattic. I know that it doesn't matter to you personally, this is just a job, and once you leave Automattic you'll look back and laugh at the absurdity of this situation. I guess the point of my comment is to say: we all know that you know this is nonsense, you're convincing nobody. If you actually believe this nonsense (which I doubt, you're not an idiot) then you need to do a much better job of convincing people.

Post reply on HN