4 ms·

They've always been actively protecting their trademark. Also small companies or meetups using WordPress were asked to change that. I think they even have to do

They've always been actively protecting their trademark. Also small companies or meetups using WordPress were asked to change that. I think they even have to do that legally to some degree to protect their trademark. WP Engine has build their success on piggybacking the WordPress trademark, their slogan is "Most Trusted WordPress Hosting and Beyond". It's probably fair they pay a fee for that. If they would just use the open source software & would market it as a blog-hosting they would most likely be in the clear.

chx 2y ago
> Similarly, a business related to WordPress themes can describe itself as “XYZ Themes, the world’s best WordPress themes,” but cannot call itself “The WordPress Theme Portal.” https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy/ https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy/ How does "Most Trusted" differ from "best" which is allowed?
- wouldbecouldbe 2y ago
  I think that's not the difference, if I read it correctly the difference is being a WordPress Host, vs a hosting company offering wordpress hosting. I think the big difference is also the marketing WP Engine is running full on The WordPress hosting.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    > being a WordPress Host, vs a hosting company offering wordpress hosting WPEngine is also offering Headless and WooCommerce as well as WordPress. So your point makes absolutely no sense.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      Automattic also owns WooCommerce.
    - wouldbecouldbe 2y ago
      Woocommerce is a Wordpress plugin. But that besides the point. The question is when is a company piggybacking on a brand. Maybe Automattic is asking for too much, but it’s very clear wp engine strongly benefited from the brand, not only the software. Just Google them now, they are marketing full on with Wordpress. I don’t see a way how they won’t win this in court.
- _cenw 2y ago
  It's the implication of a single type of entity having the official endorsement. If you change "The" to "A" in the second one it'd be fine again.
  - Ukv 2y ago
    I think you're getting them mixed up. WP Engine's slogan is: "Most Trusted WordPress Hosting and Beyond" What the WordPress foundations trademark policy specifically allows is: "the world’s best WordPress themes"
threeseed 2y ago
> They've always been actively protecting their trademark The trademark is owned by the WordPress foundation not Automattic. https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy And it has been a standard in this industry for decades (e.g. LAMP) that saying 'X Hosting' does not mean that you should be considered the owner of X. It just means you host it.
- mjburgess 2y ago
  And if you do a wayback machine till a few months ago on that policy, you'll find they actively give permission for others to use "WP" So the idea theyve been protecting their trademark is against their own trademark policy
  - bad_user 2y ago
    The claim is that, while WP is legal, it is “WordPress Engine” that was also used (in press releases or tolerated in the writings of 3rd parties), alongside “WordPress Core”, a plan which they later renamed. I don't know if this changes anything, but I'm guessing a lawsuit is coming, so we shall see. But it would be great if people did some research before commenting on the story.
    - mjburgess 2y ago
      Whenever someone's asking for 8% of gross revenue, they've lost the plot regardless of the underlying claim. For most businesses that's easily much more they're taking in profit. One imagines were this agreement in place, WPEngine would have to raise their prices to levels beyond what any customer would pay. Likewise, the use of "wordpress" as a trademark is clearly permitted when referring to wordpress; it's a common part of trademark law that you can refer to products in this manner. WPE customers do not think WPE is wordpress, it's a host. cf., "The most trusted platform for WordPress" --https://wpengine.com https://wpengine.com
    - threeseed 2y ago
      > “WordPress Engine” that was also used (in press releases) Do you have examples of these since you've done so much research ? Look forward to Automattic also going after companies using the term "WordPress Plugin" as well.
durkie 2y ago
But the software is called WordPress. How else should they say that they can host WordPress on their site without referring to it? This feels like if you were to go after someone advertising themselves as a "Honda repair shop". The sibling comment of "The WordPress Theme Portal" makes more sense as it might imply "The (Official) WordPress Theme Portal"
- stroupwaffle 2y ago
  It seems more like someone advertising as a Honda dealership.
stroupwaffle 2y ago
Yeah when I go to WPEngine site it feels like they copy-pasted it. This is the thing about open source is MOST people do not contribute anything. And we’re seeing this trend with the whole Continue.dev situation too. Copy-paste, rebrand, make some money. I think everyone needs to consider what the O.G. Wordpress team has created—and how many hours of blood, sweat, and tears went in. And then some folks just copy-paste and siphon out their business.
- homebrewer 2y ago
  They explicitly allowed it. If you don't want to be taken advantage of, put it in the license. It's honestly hard to feel sympathy for companies that release a product under a what some meme circles have called a "cuck license"¹ and then complain when some other entity adheres to the license. 1: https://lukesmith.xyz/articles/why-i-use-the-gpl-and-not-cuck-licenses/ https://lukesmith.xyz/articles/why-i-use-the-gpl-and-not-cuc... (GPL would not help in this specific case — I believe the project is already under the GPL — but his general point still stands.)
  - stroupwaffle 2y ago
    Yeah I agree—they should use the AGPL as that’s the one that protects on the server side.
- mthoms 2y ago
  Fun fact. Matt Mullenweg himself was a seed investor in WPEngine. He has either sold since then, or his share has been diluted to the point of being meaningless. The reality is that he had no problem with WPEngine until recently. Just last year he spoke at their conference.

chx 2y ago

> Similarly, a business related to WordPress themes can describe itself as “XYZ Themes, the world’s best WordPress themes,” but cannot call itself “The WordPress Theme Portal.” https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy/ https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy/ How does "Most Trusted" differ from "best" which is allowed?

wouldbecouldbe 2y ago
I think that's not the difference, if I read it correctly the difference is being a WordPress Host, vs a hosting company offering wordpress hosting. I think the big difference is also the marketing WP Engine is running full on The WordPress hosting.
- threeseed 2y ago
  > being a WordPress Host, vs a hosting company offering wordpress hosting WPEngine is also offering Headless and WooCommerce as well as WordPress. So your point makes absolutely no sense.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Automattic also owns WooCommerce.
  - wouldbecouldbe 2y ago
    Woocommerce is a Wordpress plugin. But that besides the point. The question is when is a company piggybacking on a brand. Maybe Automattic is asking for too much, but it’s very clear wp engine strongly benefited from the brand, not only the software. Just Google them now, they are marketing full on with Wordpress. I don’t see a way how they won’t win this in court.
_cenw 2y ago
It's the implication of a single type of entity having the official endorsement. If you change "The" to "A" in the second one it'd be fine again.
- Ukv 2y ago
  I think you're getting them mixed up. WP Engine's slogan is: "Most Trusted WordPress Hosting and Beyond" What the WordPress foundations trademark policy specifically allows is: "the world’s best WordPress themes"

threeseed 2y ago

> They've always been actively protecting their trademark The trademark is owned by the WordPress foundation not Automattic. https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy And it has been a standard in this industry for decades (e.g. LAMP) that saying 'X Hosting' does not mean that you should be considered the owner of X. It just means you host it.

mjburgess 2y ago
And if you do a wayback machine till a few months ago on that policy, you'll find they actively give permission for others to use "WP" So the idea theyve been protecting their trademark is against their own trademark policy
- bad_user 2y ago
  The claim is that, while WP is legal, it is “WordPress Engine” that was also used (in press releases or tolerated in the writings of 3rd parties), alongside “WordPress Core”, a plan which they later renamed. I don't know if this changes anything, but I'm guessing a lawsuit is coming, so we shall see. But it would be great if people did some research before commenting on the story.
  - mjburgess 2y ago
    Whenever someone's asking for 8% of gross revenue, they've lost the plot regardless of the underlying claim. For most businesses that's easily much more they're taking in profit. One imagines were this agreement in place, WPEngine would have to raise their prices to levels beyond what any customer would pay. Likewise, the use of "wordpress" as a trademark is clearly permitted when referring to wordpress; it's a common part of trademark law that you can refer to products in this manner. WPE customers do not think WPE is wordpress, it's a host. cf., "The most trusted platform for WordPress" --https://wpengine.com https://wpengine.com
  - threeseed 2y ago
    > “WordPress Engine” that was also used (in press releases) Do you have examples of these since you've done so much research ? Look forward to Automattic also going after companies using the term "WordPress Plugin" as well.

durkie 2y ago

But the software is called WordPress. How else should they say that they can host WordPress on their site without referring to it? This feels like if you were to go after someone advertising themselves as a "Honda repair shop". The sibling comment of "The WordPress Theme Portal" makes more sense as it might imply "The (Official) WordPress Theme Portal"

stroupwaffle 2y ago
It seems more like someone advertising as a Honda dealership.

stroupwaffle 2y ago

Yeah when I go to WPEngine site it feels like they copy-pasted it. This is the thing about open source is MOST people do not contribute anything. And we’re seeing this trend with the whole Continue.dev situation too. Copy-paste, rebrand, make some money. I think everyone needs to consider what the O.G. Wordpress team has created—and how many hours of blood, sweat, and tears went in. And then some folks just copy-paste and siphon out their business.

homebrewer 2y ago
They explicitly allowed it. If you don't want to be taken advantage of, put it in the license. It's honestly hard to feel sympathy for companies that release a product under a what some meme circles have called a "cuck license"¹ and then complain when some other entity adheres to the license. 1: https://lukesmith.xyz/articles/why-i-use-the-gpl-and-not-cuck-licenses/ https://lukesmith.xyz/articles/why-i-use-the-gpl-and-not-cuc... (GPL would not help in this specific case — I believe the project is already under the GPL — but his general point still stands.)
- stroupwaffle 2y ago
  Yeah I agree—they should use the AGPL as that’s the one that protects on the server side.
mthoms 2y ago
Fun fact. Matt Mullenweg himself was a seed investor in WPEngine. He has either sold since then, or his share has been diluted to the point of being meaningless. The reality is that he had no problem with WPEngine until recently. Just last year he spoke at their conference.