The world of WordPress, one of the vital common applied sciences for creating and internet hosting web sites, goes via a really heated controversy. The core situation is the combat between WordPress founder and Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg and WP Engine, which hosts web sites constructed on WordPress.
WordPress expertise is open supply and free, and it powers an enormous chunk of the web — round 40% of internet sites. Web sites can host their very own WordPress occasion or use an answer supplier like Automattic or WP Engine for a plug-and-play resolution.
In mid-September, Mullenweg wrote a weblog put up calling WP Engine a “most cancers to WordPress.” He criticized the host for disabling the flexibility for customers to see and monitor the revision historical past for each put up. Mullenweg believes this function is on the “core of the consumer promise of defending your knowledge” and mentioned that WP Engine turns it off by default to save cash.
He additionally referred to as out WP Engine investor Silver Lake and mentioned they don’t contribute sufficiently to the open supply mission and that WP Engine’s use of the “WP” model has confused clients into believing it’s a part of WordPress.
The authorized battle
In reply, WP Engine despatched a cease-and-desist letter to Mullenweg and Automattic to withdraw their feedback. It additionally mentioned that its use of the WordPress trademark was lined beneath honest use.
The corporate claimed that Mullenweg had mentioned he would take a “scorched earth nuclear strategy” in opposition to WP Engine except it agreed to pay “a major proportion of its revenues for a license to the WordPress trademark.”
In response, Automattic despatched its personal cease-and-desist letter to WP Engine, saying that that they had breached WordPress and WooCommerce trademark utilization guidelines.
The WordPress Basis additionally modified its Trademark Coverage web page and referred to as out WP Engine, alleging the internet hosting service has confused customers.
“The abbreviation ‘WP’ isn’t lined by the WordPress emblems, however please don’t use it in a manner that confuses folks. For instance, many individuals assume WP Engine is ‘WordPress Engine’ and formally related to WordPress, which it’s not. They’ve by no means as soon as even donated to the WordPress Basis, regardless of making billions of income on high of WordPress,” the up to date web page reads.
WP Engine ban, group influence, and trademark battle
Mullenweg then banned WP Engine from accessing the sources of WordPress.org. Whereas components like plug-ins and themes are beneath open supply license, suppliers like WP Engine must run a service to fetch them, which isn’t lined beneath the open supply license.
This broke a number of web sites and prevented them from updating plug-ins and themes. It additionally left a few of them open to safety assaults. The group was not happy with this strategy of leaving small web sites helpless.
In response to the incident, WP Engine mentioned in a put up that Mullenweg had misused his management of WordPress to intervene with WP Engine clients’ entry to WordPress.org.
“Matt Mullenweg’s unprecedented and unwarranted motion interferes with the conventional operation of your complete WordPress ecosystem, impacting not simply WP Engine and our clients, however all WordPress plugin builders and open supply customers who rely on WP Engine instruments like ACF,” WP Engine mentioned.
On September 27, WordPress.org lifted the ban briefly, permitting WP Engine to entry sources till October 1.
Mullenweg wrote a weblog put up clarifying that the combat is just in opposition to WP Engine over emblems. He mentioned Automattic has been making an attempt to dealer a trademark licensing deal for a very long time, however WP Engine’s solely response has been to “string us alongside.”
The WordPress group and different tasks really feel this might additionally occur to them and wish clarification from Automattic, which has an unique license to the WordPress trademark. The group can be asking about clear steerage round how they will and might’t use “WordPress.”
The WordPress Basis, which owns the trademark, has additionally filed to trademark “Managed WordPress” and “Hosted WordPress.” Builders and suppliers are apprehensive that if these emblems are granted, they could possibly be used in opposition to them.
Builders have expressed issues over counting on industrial open supply merchandise associated to WordPress, particularly when their entry can go away rapidly.
Open-source content material administration system Ghost’s founder John O’Nolan additionally weighed in on the difficulty and criticized management WordPress being with one particular person.
“The net wants extra impartial organizations, and it wants extra range. 40% of the net and 80% of the CMS market shouldn’t be managed by anyone particular person,” he mentioned in an X put up.
