Automattic’s response to the WP Engine lawsuit reframes the narrative

Attorneys Matt Mullenweg and Automattic filed a motion to dismiss WP Engine’s lawsuit, offering a different perspective on the causes behind the litigation.

The motion to dismiss alleges that it is not Mullenweg and Automattic that is causing harm, but WP Engine, saying that WP Engine is forcing the defendant to provide free resources and support, as well as restricting Mullenweg’s ability to express its opinions about WP. Engine practices.

The motion to dismiss begins by accusing WP Engine of selectively choosing recent events as the basis for their complaint. Then he fills in the parts that were left out, starting with the inception of WordPress over two decades ago, when Matt co-founded a way to build websites that democratized Internet publishing in the process. The motion outlines how his organization devoted thousands of person-years to developing the platform, eventually reaching a point where it now generates roughly $10 billion a year for thousands of companies and freelancers.

The purpose of the first part of the motion is to explain that Mullenweg and Automattic support the WordPress open source project because the project depends on a “symbiotic” relationship between the WordPress community and its constituents, including web hosts like WP. Motor.

“But the success and vitality of WordPress depends on a supportive and symbiotic relationship with those in the WordPress community.”

After establishing what the community is, how it was founded, and Mullenweg and Automattic’s role as a strong supporter of the community, he then paints a picture of WP Engine as a company that reaps huge benefits from volunteer work and donated time without being appropriate . giving back to the community. This is the part that Mullenweg and Automattic believe is excluded from WP Engine’s complaint, that Mullenweg was expressing his opinion that not only should WP Engine provide more support to the community, but that Mullenweg was responding to the threat posed by the complainant’s conduct.

The motion explains:

“The behavior of the WP Engine complainant is a threat to this community. WP Engine is a website hosting service built on the back of WordPress software and controlled by private equity firm Silver Lake, which claims over $100 billion in assets under management.

… In addition to the WordPress software, WP Engine also uses various free resources on the site, and its complaint alleges that access to the site is now apparently critical to its business.”

Finally, the opening part of the claim, which explains the defendant’s side of the dispute, claims that the defendant’s conduct was entirely within its legal right because there is no agreement between WordPress and WP Engine guaranteeing them access to WordPress resources and that WP Engine at no time tried to ensure access rights.

The document continues:

“But the complaint does not (and cannot) allege that WP Engine has any agreement with Matt (or anyone else, for that matter) that gives WP Engine the right to use the site’s resources. The complaint does not (and cannot) allege that WP Engine at any time attempted to secure that right from Matt or elsewhere.

Instead, WP Engine exploited the free resources offered by the site to make hundreds of millions of dollars annually. WP Engine has done this while refusing to provide meaningfully to the WordPress community and while unfairly trading the goodwill associated with the WordPress and WooCommerce trademarks.”

Allegation of trademark infringement

The motion to dismiss filed by Mullenweg and Automattic accuses WP Engine of trademark infringement, a claim that has been at the heart of Mullenweg’s dispute, which the legal response says is a dispute that Mullenweg has tried to resolve amicably in private.

The legal act states:

“In 2021, for the first time, WP Engine incorporated the WordPress trademark into the name of its own product offering, which it called “Headless WordPress,” infringing that trademark and violating the express terms of the WordPress Foundation Trademark Policy, which prohibits the use of WordPress trademarks in product names. And over time, WP Engine has progressively increased its use and prominence of the WordPress brand in its marketing materials, eventually using that brand well beyond the recognized limits of nominative fair use.”

Which sparked the dispute

The defendants claim that WP Engine has benefited from the open source community, but has refused to become an active partner in the open source community. The defendants claim they tried to bring WP Engine into the community as part of the symbiotic relationship, but WP Engine refused.

The motion to dismiss is interesting because it first alleges that WP Engine did not have an agreement with Automattic to use the WordPress brand, nor did it have an agreement for access rights to WordPress resources. It then shows how the defendants tried to reach a settlement and that it was WP Engine’s refusal to “meaningfully give back to the WordPress community” and reach a settlement with Automattic that sparked the dispute.

The document explains:

“Matt tried to raise these concerns with WP Engine and come to an amicable solution for the good of the community. Privately, Matt also encouraged WP Engine to give back to the ecosystem from which it has taken so much. Preserving and maintaining the resources made available on the website requires considerable effort and investment – an effort and investment that Matt makes to benefit those with a shared sense of mission. WP Engine does not
embrace that mission.

WP Engine and Silver Lake can’t expect to benefit from others without shouldering some of the weight – and that’s all Matt asked of them. For example, Matt suggested that WP Engine either license the Foundation’s WordPress trademarks or dedicate eight percent of its revenue to the further development of open source WordPress software.”

Mullenweg had two options

The above Mullenweg and Automattic claim is at the heart of the dispute, WP Engine’s unwillingness to reach an agreement with Automattic and become a stronger partner with the community. The motion to dismiss says WP Engine’s refusal to settle left Mullenweg with little choice as to what to do next, as the motion explains:

“When it became abundantly clear to Matt that WP Engine had no interest in backing down, Matt was left with two options: (i) allow WP Engine to unfairly exploit the free website resources, use the WordPress trademarks and WooCommerce without authorization, which would also threaten the very existence of those trademarks and remain silent about the negative impact of its behavior, or (ii) refuse to allow WP Engine to do so and publicly demand that WP Engine to do more to support the community.”

Disputes look different on each side

Matt Mullenweg and Automattic have been portrayed in an unflattering light since the WP Engine dispute broke out in public. The motion to dismiss communicates that Mullenweg’s motivations were in defense of the WordPress community, proving that every dispute looks different depending on who’s telling the story. Now it is up to the judge to decide.

Image courtesy of Shutterstock/santypan