WordPress vs. WP Engine: The Full Story

A Contentious Dispute Rocks the WordPress Ecosystem

Recent developments have significantly escalated a dispute within the WordPress community. The conflict centers around a disagreement between Matt Mullenweg, co-creator of WordPress and CEO of Automattic, and WP Engine, a prominent WordPress hosting provider.

The Foundation of the Conflict

WordPress is an open-source technology widely utilized for website creation and hosting. It currently underpins approximately 40% of all websites on the internet. Users have the option of self-hosting a WordPress installation or leveraging a service provider like Automattic or WP Engine for a streamlined experience.

The controversy ignited in mid-September when Mullenweg, who controls WordPress.org and the WordPress Foundation, publicly criticized WP Engine. He published a blog post labeling the company a detrimental influence on the WordPress project.

Specific Accusations and Legal Repercussions

Mullenweg’s critique focused on WP Engine’s perceived insufficient contributions to the open-source WordPress ecosystem. He also asserted that the company’s branding, incorporating the “WP” prefix, misled customers into believing an affiliation with the official WordPress project.

Following this public statement, a legal battle commenced between the two entities. Mullenweg has alleged trademark infringement by WP Engine. In response, WP Engine filed a lawsuit against Mullenweg and Automattic, leveling accusations of extortion, operational interference, abuse of authority, and commercial damage.

Wider Implications for the Community

This dispute has had repercussions extending beyond the involved companies. Members of the WordPress open-source community and leaders within the broader ecosystem have voiced their concerns.

Many are advocating for governance reforms and expressing anxieties regarding a perceived lack of accountability on Mullenweg’s part. The situation has prompted widespread discussion about the future direction of WordPress.

A Summary of Events

• Mullenweg publicly criticizes WP Engine, labeling them a “cancer to WordPress.”
• The core of the criticism revolves around contributions to the open-source project and branding concerns.
• A legal battle ensues, with both sides filing lawsuits against each other.
• The WordPress community expresses concerns and calls for governance changes.

The case and associated dispute remain ongoing, with further details expected to emerge as the legal proceedings unfold.

A Dispute Over Trademark Usage

Following statements made by Matt Mullenweg, WP Engine received a cease-and-desist letter in September. This communication, directed towards both Mullenweg and Automattic, requested the retraction of specific comments.

WP Engine asserted that their utilization of the WordPress trademark falls under the doctrine of fair use. They maintain their actions are legally permissible.

The company alleges that Mullenweg threatened a highly aggressive response – described as a “scorched earth nuclear approach” – unless WP Engine agreed to substantial licensing fees. These fees would have constituted a significant portion of their revenue.

Subsequently, Automattic issued a counter-cease-and-desist letter to WP Engine. This letter cited violations of the established WordPress and WooCommerce trademark usage guidelines.

The WordPress Foundation, under the ownership of Mullenweg, also revised its Trademark Policy page. This update specifically addressed WP Engine, accusing the hosting provider of misleading customers.

The revised policy clarifies that the abbreviation “WP” is not protected by WordPress trademarks. However, it cautions against using it in a manner that creates confusion. For instance, many assume WP Engine is officially linked to WordPress, which is inaccurate.

The Foundation’s statement further points out that WP Engine has not made any donations to the WordPress Foundation, despite generating substantial revenue from the WordPress platform.

Further Details on the Allegations

The core of the disagreement centers around the perception that WP Engine’s branding implies an official endorsement by or affiliation with the WordPress project. This is a key concern raised by the WordPress Foundation.

The updated Trademark Policy aims to prevent such misinterpretations and protect the integrity of the WordPress brand. It emphasizes the importance of clear communication regarding affiliations.

• WP Engine maintains its use of the trademark is legitimate.
• Automattic alleges breaches of trademark rules.
• The WordPress Foundation seeks to clarify public perception.

WP Engine Dispute and Trademark Concerns

Following a disagreement, Matt Mullenweg initiated a ban, preventing WP Engine from accessing resources on WordPress.org. While plugins and themes operate under open-source licenses, the service of retrieving these elements – a function performed by providers like WP Engine – isn't encompassed by those same licenses.

This action resulted in disruptions for numerous websites, hindering their ability to receive plugin and theme updates. Consequently, some sites were left vulnerable to potential security breaches. The wider WordPress community expressed dissatisfaction with this approach, which left smaller websites without essential support.

WP Engine responded with a public statement, asserting that Mullenweg had improperly leveraged his authority over WordPress to obstruct WP Engine customers’ access to WordPress.org.

The company elaborated, stating that Mullenweg’s “unprecedented” and “unwarranted” intervention negatively impacted the entire WordPress ecosystem. This included not only WP Engine and its clientele, but also WordPress plugin developers and open-source users who rely on WP Engine’s tools, such as Advanced Custom Fields (ACF).

A temporary lifting of the ban occurred on September 27th, granting WP Engine resource access until October 1st.

Mullenweg subsequently published a blog post, clarifying that the core of the dispute centered on trademark issues with WP Engine. He indicated that Automattic had been actively seeking a trademark licensing agreement for an extended period, but WP Engine had consistently offered only evasive responses.

In anticipation of the October 1st deadline, WP Engine updated its website footer on September 30th to explicitly state its lack of direct affiliation with the WordPress Foundation or ownership of the WordPress trademark.

The revised disclaimer read: “WP Engine is a proud member and supporter of the community of WordPress® users. The WordPress® trademark is the intellectual property of the WordPress Foundation, and the Woo® and WooCommerce® trademarks are the intellectual property of WooCommerce, Inc. Uses of the WordPress®, Woo®, and WooCommerce® names in this website are for identification purposes only and do not imply an endorsement by WordPress Foundation or WooCommerce, Inc. WP Engine is not endorsed or owned by, or affiliated with, the WordPress Foundation or WooCommerce, Inc.”

Furthermore, the company modified its plan names, changing “Essential WordPress,” “Core WordPress,” and “Enterprise WordPress” to simply “Essential,” “Core,” and “Enterprise.”

WP Engine explained that these alterations were implemented to address Automattic’s concerns and preemptively resolve the trademark dispute.

A company spokesperson conveyed to TechCrunch: “We, like the rest of the WordPress community, use the WordPress mark to describe our business. Automattic’s suggestion that WPE needs a license to do that is simply wrong, and reflects a misunderstanding of trademark law. To moot its claimed concerns, we have eliminated the few examples Automattic gave in its September 23rd letter to us.”

On October 1st, WP Engine announced via X (formerly Twitter) the successful implementation of an independent solution for updating plugins and themes.

Reporting by TechCrunch on October 15th revealed that Automattic had been planning to aggressively define its trademarks since earlier in the year, involving legal strategies described as “nice and not nice.” An internal blog post from the company’s former chief legal officer also detailed a strategy to file additional trademarks, a course of action the foundation ultimately pursued in July.

A preliminary injunction was granted to WP Engine on December 10th. This court order mandated that Automattic and Mullenweg restore WP Engine’s access to WordPress.org. It also required the removal of the developer login checkmark, which inquired about affiliation with WP Engine, and the reinstatement of WP Engine’s access to the Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) plugin.

Community Concerns and Reactions

The broader WordPress community, alongside other open-source initiatives, has voiced apprehension regarding the potential for similar situations to arise. They are seeking clarification from Automattic, the holder of the exclusive WordPress trademark license.

A key concern centers on establishing clear guidelines for permissible uses of the term “WordPress” within the community.

Trademark Filings and Developer Worries

The WordPress Foundation has submitted trademark applications for both “Managed WordPress” and “Hosted WordPress.”

This has sparked worry among developers and hosting providers, who fear these trademarks could be leveraged against them if approved.

Concerns have also been raised about the reliability of commercial open-source products linked to WordPress, particularly given the possibility of swift access revocation.

External Perspectives on Control

John O’Nolan, the founder of the Ghost content management system, offered criticism regarding the concentration of control within a single entity.

He argued that a significant portion of the web and the CMS market – 40% and 80% respectively – should not be under the dominion of one individual.

David Heinemeier Hansson, creator of the Ruby on Rails framework, asserted that Automattic’s request for 8% of WP Engine’s revenue violates the core tenets of open-source software.

He emphasized that the potential damage extends beyond WordPress itself, urging observers not to be distracted by the specifics of the dispute.

Contributor Login and Community Backlash

On October 9, Matt Mullenweg implemented a new checkbox on the WordPress.org contributor login page.

This checkbox required contributors to affirm they had no affiliation with WP Engine, a move that drew criticism from within the contributor community.

Reports surfaced of contributors being removed from the community Slack channel for expressing opposition to this change.

Control of ACF Plugin

WP Engine lost control of the Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) plugin on October 12.

This plugin, which simplifies the addition of custom fields within the WordPress edit screen, was taken over by WordPress.org.

As a result, WP Engine was unable to release updates to the open-source plugin, a move justified by WordPress.org and Mullenweg as being within plugin guidelines.

Event Interference and Data Requests

Allegations arose that WordPress requested organizers of WordCamp Sydney to remove content referencing WP Engine.

Furthermore, leaked letters indicated Automattic requested social media account credentials from event organizers globally, citing “safe storage of future events.”

WP Engine Tracker and Legal Action

Automattic launched a “WP Engine Tracker” page on November 7, showcasing websites migrating from WP Engine to alternative hosting providers.

A court injunction subsequently mandated the removal of specific client data from this tracker.

Calls for a Decentralized Approach

In December, Joost de Valk, former CEO of Yoast, proposed a “Federated” model for WordPress.org, aiming to eliminate centralized control.

Karim Marucchi, CEO of Crowd Favorite, voiced support for this movement in a separate blog post.

Reduced Contributions and Account Blocks

In January 2025, Mullenweg announced a reduction in Automattic’s contributions to the Five for the Future project.

This reduction aligned with WP Engine’s contribution level of 45 hours per week, with Automattic reallocating resources to its own product development and the ongoing legal battle.

Subsequently, Mullenweg blocked the WordPress.org accounts of numerous contributors, including de Valk and Marucchi, citing concerns about potential plans for a WordPress fork.

However, de Valk clarified to TechCrunch that no such fork was being planned.

WP Engine Legal Action

A lawsuit was initiated by WP Engine against Automattic and Matt Mullenweg on October 3rd, filed in a California court. The claim centers around alleged abuse of power. WP Engine further asserts that Automattic and Mullenweg failed to uphold commitments regarding the open-source nature of WordPress projects.

According to a statement released to TechCrunch, WP Engine believes that recent actions by Matt Mullenweg have revealed substantial conflicts of interest and governance concerns. These issues, if unresolved, are perceived as a threat to the trust within the WordPress community. The company stated it had no alternative but to pursue legal recourse to safeguard its stakeholders.

Allegations and Responses

The legal complaint references purported text messages involving Mullenweg and discussions about potentially employing WP Engine’s CEO, Heather Brunner. Mullenweg, in a comment posted on Hacker News, indicated that Brunner had expressed interest in a leadership role with WordPress.org.

Automattic has responded to the lawsuit, characterizing it as without merit. Their legal counsel, Neal Katyal, stated in a blog post that a thorough review of WP Engine’s complaint revealed no valid claims.

On October 18th, WP Engine submitted a request for an injunction to a California court. This request sought the reinstatement of their access to WordPress.org. Subsequently, on October 19th, an administrative motion was filed, urging the court to expedite the hearing for the preliminary injunction.

Arguments Presented

Mullenweg and his team filed a document opposing the request for an expedited hearing on October 21st. Their argument focused on the assertion that the core issue isn't access to the WordPress software itself. They pointed out that WP Engine already possesses access to the GitHub repository ("https://github.com/WordPress/WordPress") and can utilize it as they see fit.

The filing clarified that the dispute concerns WordPress.org, a website personally owned and managed by Matt Mullenweg for the benefit of the WordPress community. It emphasized that WordPress.org operates independently of Automattic and the WordPress Foundation.

“WordPress.org is distinct from WordPress,” the document stated. “It is not under the control of Automattic or the WordPress Foundation, and Mr. Mullenweg bears the responsibility for its operation.”

Upcoming Hearings and Motions

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin announced on October 23rd that the initial hearing for the primary injunction is scheduled for November 26th, pending no objections.

On October 30th, Mullenweg and Automattic filed a motion to dismiss key allegations put forth by WP Engine. This motion argues that WP Engine’s own actions are responsible for any harm it has experienced.

The court document asserts that WP Engine is seeking to compel Mullenweg to provide resources and support without any contractual obligation or prior agreement. This request is framed as an attempt to obtain free services despite being a privately-owned, equity-backed company.

In response, WP Engine submitted documentation referencing Mullenweg’s public statements at the TC Disrupt event, specifically regarding the business losses incurred by WP Engine.

Significant Departures at Automattic

A notable event occurred on October 3rd, as 159 Automattic employees, dissenting with Matt Mullenweg’s vision for the company and the future of WordPress, accepted severance packages and departed. A substantial majority – nearly 80% – of those leaving were affiliated with Automattic’s Ecosystem / WordPress division.

On October 8th, WordPress announced the appointment of Mary Hubbard, formerly the head of governance and experience at TikTok U.S., as the new executive director. This position was previously occupied by Josepha Haden Chomphosy, who was among the 159 employees who chose to leave Automattic.

Prior to this announcement, on October 7th, an engineer from WP Engine publicly revealed their acceptance of a position at Automattic.

As a gesture of appreciation, Matt Mullenweg announced on October 12th that all current Automattic employees would receive 200 A12 shares. These shares, exclusive to Automattic personnel, are vested after a one-year period and do not have an expiration date.

Further action was taken on October 17th, when Mullenweg extended another alignment offer via Automattic’s Slack channels. This offer, requiring a response within four hours, included a nine-month severance package.

However, Mullenweg also stipulated that accepting this offer would result in the forfeiture of access to the WordPress.org community.

Contact the reporter at im@ivanmehta.com or via Signal: @ivan.42