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

Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

automattic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 53 posts

Re: Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

#41

Post by alanfranz »

I’m far from being an expert in trademark law (esp. US trademark law). But I think WP Engine could be more clear about their usages of such trademarks.

I work for a company (aiven.io) which offers hosted services mostly for OSS products. All of our products are always called “Aiven for…” to prevent confusion, and there’re strict rules in place about that. It’s always “Aiven for ClickHouse(R)”, never just “ClickHouse”.

Re: Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

#43

Post by handfuloflight »

keane wrote: post #32
AnonC wrote: post #30

This whole incident (with the information from texts and posts shared in the “Cease and Desist” letter by WP Engine) makes Matt seem like a disgruntled person who’s after another company because his ego is hurt when his efforts to extort money from it failed. This doesn’t do any good to the reputation of Automattic or WordPress. If this goes to court, I hope WP Engine wins, not because it’s a good open source partici…

Correct me if I have the timeline wrong but is my assessment correct that this played out roughly: 1) Matt creates WordPress under GPL, his friend coins the software’s name, Matt creates a company to offer commercial services of it, and registers the trademark. (2003—2006) 2) Automattic donates the trademark to a Foundation while retaining an unlimited license to the marks for commercial use and is designated to enfo…

Don't forget the part where Automattic invests money into WPEngine, 13 years ago.

Re: Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

#44

Post by keane »

handfuloflight wrote: post #43
keane wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I have the timeline wrong but is my assessment correct that this played out roughly: 1) Matt creates WordPress under GPL, his friend coins the software’s name, Matt creates a company to offer commercial services of it, and registers the trademark. (2003—2006) 2) Automattic donates the trademark to a Foundation while retaining an unlimited license to the marks for commercial use and is designated to enfo…

Don't forget the part where Automattic invests money into WPEngine, 13 years ago.

I’m not sure that data point constitutes evidence that anyone was opposed to commercial uses of the mark that avoided creating confusion around the mark and the project.

Re: Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

#45

Post by handfuloflight »

keane wrote: post #44
handfuloflight wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the part where Automattic invests money into WPEngine, 13 years ago.

I’m not sure that data point constitutes evidence that anyone was opposed to commercial uses of the mark that avoided creating confusion around the mark and the project.

WPEngine can likely show there hasn't been a material change in their marketing dress since that investment was made that would constitute active confusion on their behalf.

Re: Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

#46

Post by pluc »

This is such a pathetic attempt. The exhibits even includes someone saying "hey maybe you should use items where WPEngine itself refers as WordPress engine" (twice!) and you obviously won't find that... so they're going after clueless users of WPEngine. WP Engine is called WP Engine and uses WordPress. There's nothing infringing with any of that. If people call it WordPress Engine, it's their problem and WPEngine isn't liable for it... As for all the "WordPress" mentions on WPEngine's site... well that is the software they're selling. Would Matt not throw another fit if they'd fork WordPress and call it WildPages?

Re: Open Source, Trademarks, and WP Engine

#48

Post by keane »

handfuloflight wrote: post #45
keane wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure that data point constitutes evidence that anyone was opposed to commercial uses of the mark that avoided creating confusion around the mark and the project.

WPEngine can likely show there hasn't been a material change in their marketing dress since that investment was made that would constitute active confusion on their behalf.

I’m imagining they weren’t calling themselves "The most trusted WordPress platform" and "The Most Trusted WordPress Tech Company" 13 years ago. 'Trusted' can be read with the meaning 'seen as trustworthy' rather than the meaning 'utilized' which could be found to be creating confusion.
Post reply on HN