The world of WordPress, one of the vital widespread applied sciences for creating and internet hosting web sites, goes by means of a really heated controversy. The core challenge is the battle between WordPress founder and Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg and WP Engine, which hosts web sites constructed on WordPress.
WordPress know-how 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 publish 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 publish. Mullenweg believes this function is on the “core of the person promise of defending your information” and mentioned that WP Engine turns it off by default to economize.
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 prospects 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 coated underneath 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 they’d 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’ is just not coated by the WordPress logos, however please don’t use it in a means 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 impression, and trademark battle
Mullenweg then banned WP Engine from accessing the assets of WordPress.org. Whereas components like plug-ins and themes are underneath open supply license, suppliers like WP Engine should run a service to fetch them, which isn’t coated underneath the open supply license.
This broke a variety 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 publish that Mullenweg had misused his management of WordPress to intervene with WP Engine prospects’ entry to WordPress.org.
“Matt Mullenweg’s unprecedented and unwarranted motion interferes with the traditional operation of all the WordPress ecosystem, impacting not simply WP Engine and our prospects, 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 quickly, permitting WP Engine to entry assets till October 1.
Mullenweg wrote a weblog publish clarifying that the battle is simply in opposition to WP Engine over logos. 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 need 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 anxious that if these logos are granted, they may very well be used in opposition to them.
Builders have expressed considerations 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 problem and criticized management WordPress being with one individual.
“The online wants extra unbiased organizations, and it wants extra range. 40% of the online and 80% of the CMS market shouldn’t be managed by anyone particular person,” he mentioned in an X publish.
On September 30, a day earlier than the WordPress.org deadline for the ban on WP Engine, the internet hosting firm up to date its website’s footer to make clear it isn’t instantly affiliated with the WordPress Basis or owns the WordPress commerce.
“WP Engine is a proud member and supporter of the group of WordPress® customers. The WordPress® trademark is the mental property of the WordPress Basis, and the Woo® and WooCommerce® logos are the mental property of WooCommerce, Inc. Makes use of of the WordPress®, Woo®, and WooCommerce® names on this web site are for identification functions solely and don’t indicate an endorsement by WordPress Basis or WooCommerce, Inc. WP Engine is just not endorsed or owned by, or affiliated with, the WordPress Basis or WooCommerce, Inc,” the up to date description on the location learn.
The corporate additionally modified its plan names from “Important WordPress,” “Core WordPress,” and “Enterprise WordPress” to “Important,” “Core,” and “Enterprise.”
