9 ms·

WordPress.org isn't renting anything, it's providing those services for free. The analogy with AWS doesn't work because with WP money doesn't change hands. WP E

WordPress.org isn't renting anything, it's providing those services for free. The analogy with AWS doesn't work because with WP money doesn't change hands. WP Engine or their users aren't paying for the services provided by WordPress.org and these are services that cost money for continued hosting. Anything provided is a gift and WP.org is under no obligation, moral or contractual, to keep providing those services. There are many issues with how this was handled but this isn't one of them.

flutas 2y ago
> WordPress.org isn't renting anything and WP.org isn't being targeted at all by WP Engine. > The analogy with AWS doesn't work because with WP money doesn't change hands. WP Engine or their users aren't paying for the services provided by WordPress.org and these are services that cost money for continued hosting. First of all, the analogy is very good imo. Amazon in this case is WP.com, Windows would be WP.org. They are supposed to be completely separate legal entities. Now on to your "point" > users aren't paying for the services Neither are people hosting it on WP.com (Automattic). Automattic is supposed to be a completely separate legal entity. Is Automattic (again wp.COM, not ORG) paying wp.ORG for this access to the wp.ORG theme/plugin API in a way that can be verified? Is this a requirement for everyone hosting WP now? What are the API rate costs and where do you pay? > There are many issues with how this was handled but this isn't one of them. Yes, this is absolutely one of them. Is wp.ORG and wp.COM the same company or not. Because either way, it smells like a 501c3 getting stripped.
- bad_user 2y ago
  WP.org isn't independent obviously because it's being funded in large part by Automattic who pays the bills. And this issue of independence is separate, don't move the discussion... Why is WP.org obligated to provide free services to WP Engine and their users? Why the entitlement?
  - chuckadams 2y ago
    Why is WP.org entitled to selectively blacklist one downstream consumer and not others? Have they demonstrated that WPE is putting undue load on the infrastructure? Have they even alleged it until just now? If wp.org is part of the foundation, then they have a legally binding mission, and "acting in Automattic's strategic interests" is not in there. If they're not, then a8c is intentionally obfuscating their ownership of wp.org, thus placing the credibility and legal status of the foundation in jeopardy.
    - batuhanicoz 2y ago
      > If wp.org is part of the foundation It is not. > a8c is intentionally obfuscating their ownership of wp.org Automattic (my employer) does not own WordPress.org There is no obligation on WordPress.org's part to provide free services to WP Engine. WP Engine uses trademarks in misleading ways while WordPress.org has a license from WPF to use the trademark.
      - chuckadams 2y ago
        So wordpress.org is owned entirely by Matt Mullenweg? The vast majority and default location of the whole plugin and theme distribution infrastructure is owned by one person? Perhaps you could point me to some page on wordpress.org that clarifies the ownership situation.
      - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
        > Automattic (my employer) does not own WordPress.org I really think your employer is lying to you about this. The Automattic CEO made an official WordPress.org announcement that the .org was taking action against WP Engine on September 25 in response to legal threats. WP Engine says - and neither Automattic nor WordPress.org have produced evidence to the contrary - that the only legal threat they've made was their public one to Automattic on September 23. This clearly implies to me that Mullenweg is operating WordPress.org as an extension of Automattic and its business interests, regardless of what official ownership records might say.
  - 2y ago
FireBeyond 2y ago
The reality and the lines are far less clear than you describe it. Your response ignores many things: 1. WP.org is supposedly NOT part of the foundation, but something of Matt/Automattic's generosity. 2. Despite this, solicits donations that seemingly go to the foundation. 3. Despite this, is hosted on the foundation's AS number. 4. WP.org may not be under obligation to provide services, but when it chooses to discontinue services to one independent for profit user of the open source software, but not to another ostensibly independent for profit user of the open source software that just so happens to be owned by the person donating the services, then there is a conflict. 5. When the open source software, which has a hard coded news feed source that is mostly written by said owner, and this is used to post articles disparaging that other company, directly to their customers, this is also a conflict.
- bad_user 2y ago
  My question, related to the parent's post: why is WP.org under any obligation to provide any service to WP Engine and its users? And you're saying that they targeted one user specifically ... I say, where's the problem? To make a proper analogy, if Google abused Wikipedia or the Internet Archive, shouldn't these non-profits have the power to ban one specific user from abusing their free services? And yes, Automattic pays WP.org's bills. I would prefer independence ... maybe if more companies contributed, that would happen.
  - rstupek 2y ago
    What if the open source software had hardcoded links to check for updates of itself and for downloading of plugins? Would that change their obligations in providing services for updates and plugin downloads?
  - bastawhiz 2y ago
    > to provide any service to WP Engine and its users? WordPress hard codes their own URLs in their software. They don't have published pricing. There's no criteria for who should have to pay unless they're WPE. By the argument you're making, what makes it okay for anyone to run WordPress on a server without the host of that server paying a fee to WordPress? There's nothing that sets WPE apart from any other service out there that hosts WordPress except that Matt M decided he's on a crusade.
bastawhiz 2y ago
> WP Engine or their users aren't paying for the services provided by WordPress.org and these are services that cost money for continued hosting Why should WPE pay? They are hosting software on behalf of their users. It's (as far as we know) just stock WordPress. Should linode or Hetzner be forced to pay for their users to host WordPress on their servers? The only difference here is that WPE preinstalls WordPress for the user. And to my point, the person who benefits is the end user, not WPE. WPE benefits in so far as their customers get to benefit from these services. But WPE isn't adding URLs to WordPress.org, that's what the software hard codes. So the truth is that yes, WordPress is trying to extract rent, because they gladly let anyone run their software on any server except WPE, and that's the case because they're demanding fees (which are completely arbitrary).

flutas 2y ago

> WordPress.org isn't renting anything and WP.org isn't being targeted at all by WP Engine. > The analogy with AWS doesn't work because with WP money doesn't change hands. WP Engine or their users aren't paying for the services provided by WordPress.org and these are services that cost money for continued hosting. First of all, the analogy is very good imo. Amazon in this case is WP.com, Windows would be WP.org. They are supposed to be completely separate legal entities. Now on to your "point" > users aren't paying for the services Neither are people hosting it on WP.com (Automattic). Automattic is supposed to be a completely separate legal entity. Is Automattic (again wp.COM, not ORG) paying wp.ORG for this access to the wp.ORG theme/plugin API in a way that can be verified? Is this a requirement for everyone hosting WP now? What are the API rate costs and where do you pay? > There are many issues with how this was handled but this isn't one of them. Yes, this is absolutely one of them. Is wp.ORG and wp.COM the same company or not. Because either way, it smells like a 501c3 getting stripped.

bad_user 2y ago
WP.org isn't independent obviously because it's being funded in large part by Automattic who pays the bills. And this issue of independence is separate, don't move the discussion... Why is WP.org obligated to provide free services to WP Engine and their users? Why the entitlement?
- chuckadams 2y ago
  Why is WP.org entitled to selectively blacklist one downstream consumer and not others? Have they demonstrated that WPE is putting undue load on the infrastructure? Have they even alleged it until just now? If wp.org is part of the foundation, then they have a legally binding mission, and "acting in Automattic's strategic interests" is not in there. If they're not, then a8c is intentionally obfuscating their ownership of wp.org, thus placing the credibility and legal status of the foundation in jeopardy.
  - batuhanicoz 2y ago
    > If wp.org is part of the foundation It is not. > a8c is intentionally obfuscating their ownership of wp.org Automattic (my employer) does not own WordPress.org There is no obligation on WordPress.org's part to provide free services to WP Engine. WP Engine uses trademarks in misleading ways while WordPress.org has a license from WPF to use the trademark.
    - chuckadams 2y ago
      So wordpress.org is owned entirely by Matt Mullenweg? The vast majority and default location of the whole plugin and theme distribution infrastructure is owned by one person? Perhaps you could point me to some page on wordpress.org that clarifies the ownership situation.
    - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
      > Automattic (my employer) does not own WordPress.org I really think your employer is lying to you about this. The Automattic CEO made an official WordPress.org announcement that the .org was taking action against WP Engine on September 25 in response to legal threats. WP Engine says - and neither Automattic nor WordPress.org have produced evidence to the contrary - that the only legal threat they've made was their public one to Automattic on September 23. This clearly implies to me that Mullenweg is operating WordPress.org as an extension of Automattic and its business interests, regardless of what official ownership records might say.
- 2y ago

FireBeyond 2y ago

The reality and the lines are far less clear than you describe it. Your response ignores many things: 1. WP.org is supposedly NOT part of the foundation, but something of Matt/Automattic's generosity. 2. Despite this, solicits donations that seemingly go to the foundation. 3. Despite this, is hosted on the foundation's AS number. 4. WP.org may not be under obligation to provide services, but when it chooses to discontinue services to one independent for profit user of the open source software, but not to another ostensibly independent for profit user of the open source software that just so happens to be owned by the person donating the services, then there is a conflict. 5. When the open source software, which has a hard coded news feed source that is mostly written by said owner, and this is used to post articles disparaging that other company, directly to their customers, this is also a conflict.

bad_user 2y ago
My question, related to the parent's post: why is WP.org under any obligation to provide any service to WP Engine and its users? And you're saying that they targeted one user specifically ... I say, where's the problem? To make a proper analogy, if Google abused Wikipedia or the Internet Archive, shouldn't these non-profits have the power to ban one specific user from abusing their free services? And yes, Automattic pays WP.org's bills. I would prefer independence ... maybe if more companies contributed, that would happen.
- rstupek 2y ago
  What if the open source software had hardcoded links to check for updates of itself and for downloading of plugins? Would that change their obligations in providing services for updates and plugin downloads?
- bastawhiz 2y ago
  > to provide any service to WP Engine and its users? WordPress hard codes their own URLs in their software. They don't have published pricing. There's no criteria for who should have to pay unless they're WPE. By the argument you're making, what makes it okay for anyone to run WordPress on a server without the host of that server paying a fee to WordPress? There's nothing that sets WPE apart from any other service out there that hosts WordPress except that Matt M decided he's on a crusade.

bastawhiz 2y ago

> WP Engine or their users aren't paying for the services provided by WordPress.org and these are services that cost money for continued hosting Why should WPE pay? They are hosting software on behalf of their users. It's (as far as we know) just stock WordPress. Should linode or Hetzner be forced to pay for their users to host WordPress on their servers? The only difference here is that WPE preinstalls WordPress for the user. And to my point, the person who benefits is the end user, not WPE. WPE benefits in so far as their customers get to benefit from these services. But WPE isn't adding URLs to WordPress.org, that's what the software hard codes. So the truth is that yes, WordPress is trying to extract rent, because they gladly let anyone run their software on any server except WPE, and that's the case because they're demanding fees (which are completely arbitrary).