4 ms·
> 8% is typical for a franchise fee I see many WordPress hosts use these trademarks in the same way WP Engine does. How many of them are paying this typical 8
by JimDabell 2y ago
> 8% is typical for a franchise fee
I see many WordPress hosts use these trademarks in the same way WP Engine does.
How many of them are paying this typical 8% of monthly revenue fee?
- cdolan 2y agoNarrator: Zero Source: Matt
- photomatt 2y agoOther hosts have contributed significantly to WordPress.org and Automattic over the years, in a variety of arrangements. None have abused the WordPress and WooCommerce trademark as much as WP Engine has, hence our C&D against them.
- JimDabell 2y agoI didn’t ask about “a variety of arrangements” though, I asked about the terms you describe as “typical”.
- FireBeyond 2y ago> Other hosts have contributed significantly to WordPress.org and Automattic over the years In reverse order: 1. Why on earth are other hosts obligated to contribute to Automattic, their competitor, just because Automattic also contributes to the open source project? 2. You have, on multiple recent occasions, spelt out unequivocally that WordPress.org is YOU, and not the Foundation. Again, why on earth are WordPress hosts obligated to contribute to you?
- tky 2y agoThe more Matt tries to explain himself, the more this looks like a protection racket.
- camgunz 2y agoA couple posts up is claiming Mullenweg's singling out WP Engine, and here you're claiming he runs a protection racket against anyone who wants to make money running WordPress sites. Which is it?
- tky 2y agoI said no such thing.
- camgunz 2y agoIt's hard for me to believe your idea of a racket is pressuring a single business. You can't have it both ways.
- ceejayoz 2y agoDoesn't every protection racket start with a first victim/customer?
- camgunz 2y agoThis argument is pretty tedious. If I have a chicken, I don't have a dozen chickens, even though maybe that chicken could (or even will) lay eggs and make more chickens. But all that aside, it sounds like Mullenweg's basic argument is: WP Engine dilutes the WordPress trademark, offers a limited (I think he would be stronger about this characterization) implementation of WordPress, doesn't give back to the community, and that's bad. I can understand that, it sounds like it's the beginning of a race to the bottom where hosts compete to find exactly how many features they can shave off of WordPress--while still calling it WordPress--in order to maximize their profits, entirely at the expense of users and WordPress itself. It is completely his right for him to cut them off from the stuff he owns and runs for any reason, but in particular this seems to be a pretty good cause. I really don't understand why people are so against him here.
- 2y ago
- gamblor956 2y agoSeriously, you need to stop talking. You've admitted a number of times in this thread that you consider the nonprofit organization to be just an extension of the for profit company. There are serious consequences for that for the organizations and you personally.
- mthoms 2y agoThe source for that figure is literally "random person on twitter". I'm not even joking. Matt reposted it earlier today. https://x.com/sandro_groganz/status/1841437394236489874 https://x.com/sandro_groganz/status/1841437394236489874