By BrightNewsBeat 
The world of WordPress, one of the most popular technologies for creating and hosting websites, is currently embroiled in a heated controversy. The core issue revolves around a conflict between WordPress founder and Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg and WP Engine, a company that hosts websites built on WordPress.
WordPress technology is open source and free, powering around 40% of the internet. Websites can host their own WordPress instance or utilize a solution provider like Automattic or WP Engine for a plug-and-play experience.
The Controversy
In mid-September, Mullenweg published a blog post calling WP Engine a “cancer to WordPress.” He criticized the hosting service for disabling users’ ability to view and track the revision history of their posts. Mullenweg argued that this feature is fundamental to the user promise of protecting data, and claimed that WP Engine disables it by default to save money. He also took issue with WP Engine investor Silver Lake, suggesting they do not contribute sufficiently to the open-source project, and expressed concern that WP Engine’s use of the “WP” brand misleads customers into believing it is part of WordPress.
The Legal Battle
In response, WP Engine issued a cease-and-desist letter to Mullenweg and Automattic, demanding the withdrawal of his comments. They claimed that their use of the WordPress trademark falls under fair use. WP Engine further alleged that Mullenweg had threatened to take a “scorched earth nuclear approach” against them unless they paid a “significant percentage” of their revenues for a license to the WordPress trademark.
Automattic retaliated with its own cease-and-desist letter, asserting that WP Engine had violated WordPress and WooCommerce trademark usage rules. The WordPress Foundation updated its Trademark Policy page, criticizing WP Engine for causing user confusion. The Foundation noted that while the abbreviation “WP” is not covered by the WordPress trademarks, its use in a misleading manner is discouraged.
The Foundation emphasized that WP Engine has never contributed to the WordPress Foundation despite generating significant revenue from the platform.
Consequences for the Community
Subsequently, Mullenweg banned WP Engine from accessing resources on WordPress.org. This action disrupted many websites, preventing them from updating plugins and themes and leaving them vulnerable to security issues. The community reacted negatively to Mullenweg’s approach, arguing it unfairly harmed small websites.
WP Engine responded, claiming that Mullenweg had misused his control over WordPress to interfere with the access of its customers to WordPress.org resources. They argued that Mullenweg’s actions disrupted the normal operation of the WordPress ecosystem, impacting not only WP Engine but also WordPress plugin developers and users who rely on WP Engine’s tools.
On September 27, WordPress.org temporarily lifted the ban, allowing WP Engine access to resources until October 1. Mullenweg clarified in a blog post that the conflict was solely about WP Engine’s trademark usage, stating that Automattic had been trying to negotiate a trademark licensing deal for an extended period, but WP Engine had only responded by “stringing us along.”
The broader WordPress community expressed concerns that similar issues could affect them in the future. Developers and providers sought clarification from Automattic, which holds an exclusive license to the WordPress trademark, on how they could appropriately use “WordPress.”
Additionally, the WordPress Foundation filed to trademark “Managed WordPress” and “Hosted WordPress,” raising concerns among developers about potential restrictions on their use of these terms.
Perspectives from the Community
John O’Nolan, founder of the open-source content management system Ghost, criticized the concentration of control over WordPress, stating, “The web needs more independent organizations, and it needs more diversity. Forty percent of the web and eighty percent of the CMS market should not be controlled by any one individual.”
On September 30, a day before the deadline for the WP Engine ban, the company updated its website footer to clarify that it is not directly affiliated with the WordPress Foundation. The updated description stated that WP Engine is a supporter of the WordPress community, but it does not imply endorsement by the WordPress Foundation.
WP Engine also revised its plan names, dropping “Essential WordPress,” “Core WordPress,” and “Enterprise WordPress” in favor of simpler names like “Essential,” “Core,” and “Enterprise.” The company stated that these changes were made to address Automattic’s concerns.
On October 1, WP Engine announced that it had successfully implemented its own solution for updating plugins and themes.
Recent Developments
On October 3, WP Engine filed a lawsuit against Automattic and Mullenweg in California, alleging abuse of power. The company claimed that Mullenweg and Automattic had failed to uphold their commitment to running WordPress open-source projects without constraints, restricting developers’ freedom to build, run, modify, and redistribute the software.
WP Engine’s statement highlighted concerns about Mullenweg’s conduct over the preceding days, suggesting it threatened trust within the WordPress community. The lawsuit referenced alleged messages from Mullenweg regarding the potential hiring of WP Engine CEO Heather Brunner, who reportedly wanted to become the executive director of WordPress.org.
In response, Automattic characterized WP Engine’s lawsuit as meritless. Neal Katyal, Automattic’s legal representative, expressed skepticism about the lawsuit’s validity, asserting they looked forward to the federal court’s consideration of the claims.
On the same day, a significant shift occurred as 159 Automattic employees opted for a severance package in disagreement with Mullenweg’s direction for the company and WordPress. Notably, nearly 80% of those who departed worked in Automattic’s Ecosystem/WordPress division.
