4 ms·

“WP Engine is free to offer their hacked up, bastardized simulacra of WordPress’s GPL code to their customers, and they can experience WordPress as WP Engine en

“WP Engine is free to offer their hacked up, bastardized simulacra of WordPress’s GPL code to their customers, and they can experience WordPress as WP Engine envisions it" Does anyone know what the context about this is? What did WP-Engine change which Matt disliked? As I understand they were disabling page revision history (but would enable it if you asked) and only because they had some other proprietary to wp-engine method of versioning and rollbacks but this seems like a massive overreaction to that.

i_am_jl 2y ago
WordPress doesn't like products/orgs that offer services related to WordPress using "WP" in their name to imply affiliation with WordPress. WordPress has recently updated their terms of use to reflect this. Matt is also on record criticizing WP Engine for never having donated to the WordPress Foundation. This is all coming to light after the breakdown of licensing negotiations between Automattic and WPEngine EDIT: https://www.therepository.email/mullenweg-threatens-corporate-takeover-of-wp-engine https://www.therepository.email/mullenweg-threatens-corporat...
- unsnap_biceps 2y ago
  This is a bit of after the fact complaining. Matt invested in WPEngine for many years and it was a-okay then for them to use WP, and in fact WP's own terms said WP was a free to use term for everyone. That was only changed when the legal squabbles started. The main legal issues are around using "WordPress" and "WooCommerce"
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  > Matt is also on record criticizing WP Engine for never having donated to the WordPress Foundation. Donate, perhaps. Sponsor? The Foundation event where Matt "went nuclear" last month was sponsored by WP Engine to the tune of $75,000. And was one of many donations this year. (Adding insult to injury, the "independent" Foundation banned WP Engine from attending the event they were sponsoring... because they were in dispute with Automattic.)
  - dylan604 2y ago
    There's a difference between sponsoring an event and donating to the operations of the core project. I know nothing about the specifics on the event, but I've done events where $75,000 would almost cover the cost of the stage. I've also seen events where the cost of the event was covered by sponsors many times over.
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      There is. But Matt's BS "They've done nothing for WordPress but leech and freeload and give back nothing to the community" is patently false. Don't even start me on how "President of the WordPress Foundation, Matt Mullenweg", accepted their sponsorship check and then disinvited them from the event because they were in a conflict with "President of Automattic, Matt Mullenweg", and wouldn't even return the sponsorship check. In essence, if nothing else, that makes it a donation, because they sponsored the event, but got nothing for their sponsorship except knowing they... uhh... contributed to the community.
    - lsaferite 2y ago
      The foundation doesn't even contribute to core development anyway. Check out their yearly financial reports. In Matt's world, the only 'donation' that would directly support development would be to the commercial entity Automatic who is a direct competitor.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  > WordPress has recently updated their terms of use to reflect this. That’s… a very odd way of portraying this. The policy, for like a decade, was: “The abbreviation “WP” is not covered by the WordPress trademarks and you are free to use it in any way you see fit.” https://www.reddit.com/r/Wordpress/comments/1foknoq/the_wordpress_foundation_trademark_policy_was/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Wordpress/comments/1foknoq/the_word...
  - i_am_jl 2y ago
    Sure, allow me to clarify. Matt voices a number of grievances including WP Engine's changes to WordPress, their use of the term "WP", their donation/sponsorships, and more. At first glance they all seem a bit silly. The important context, in my opinion, is that this comes after the breakdown of a licensing agreement between WP Engine and Automattic, an agreement that would've seen tens of millions of dollars paid to Automattic by WP Engine for a license that WP Engine does not think they need. To put a point on it, none of the things WP Engine is accused of doing were problematic before the breakdown of licensing negotiations or the filing of WP Engine's lawsuit.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      But they explicitly say, and have for years, that “WP” can be used by anyone for any purpose. You can’t turn around and try to enforce that.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - i_am_jl 2y ago
        >But they explicitly say, and have for years, that “WP” can be used by anyone for any purpose. >You can’t turn around and try to enforce that. I'm not sure what you mean. WordPress is quite clearly turning around and trying to enforce that. It's a shakedown, the whole point is to force WP Engine back into licensing talks. A bulletproof legal foundation isn't necessary, just a legitimate complaint that can force WP Engine into court.
unsnap_biceps 2y ago
Per https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine-banned/ https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine-banned/ and https://x.com/photomatt/status/1838502185879167069 https://x.com/photomatt/status/1838502185879167069 I believe that WPEngine disabling the admin news feed that displayed his posts directly to WPEngine's customers was the tipping point for calling it a hacked up, bastardized simulacra
- rahkiin 2y ago
  That was after he made a personal post hating on WPEngine show up on all dashboard of all WPEngine customers. I read the revisions are often turned off as they cause major issues with database performance. It is a standard feature of wordpress too but them turning it off by default triggered matt
- EFreethought 2y ago
  I run a couple of WP instances on a shared hosting service (not WPEngine), and honestly I have no need for the admin news feed. If I knew how to turn it off I would. That is a weird thing to get upset about.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Is it? I don't know Matt, but it sounds just like Musk forcing his feeds to the top of everyone, or everyone forced to being Tom's friend.
    - unsnap_biceps 2y ago
      I think the key difference is that Twitter or MySpace wasn't GPL software. Matt is complaining that someone modified "his" GPL software, as the license he's using grants them the privilege to do.
      - dylan604 2y ago
        I was referring to the admin news portion being forced upon everyone, not the state of code availability
tedivm 2y ago
Honestly this seems like Matt just wants WP Engine to give him a ton of money, and when they refused his extortion he threw a temper tantrum and abused his dual lead as head of Wordpress.com (the commercial wordpress) and Wordpress.org (the supposedly independent foundation). The lawsuit that WPEngine filed against Automatic and Matt specifically is a hell of a read. https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Complaint-WP-Engine-v-Automattic-et-al.pdf https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Complaint-WP...
- lsaferite 2y ago
  The foundation isn't even 'wordpress.org', it's 'wordpressfoundation.org'. The 'wordpress.org' site is wholly owned and managed by Matt (using Automatic resources from what he's said). So, it's not just his dual role, it's his triple role.
GavinAnderegg 2y ago
It's about revision history, as Matt laid out here: https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine/ https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine/ However, disabling revision history is a setting offered as part of WordPress: https://wordpress.org/documentation/article/revisions/#revision-options https://wordpress.org/documentation/article/revisions/#revis... I'd argue that WordPress.com, the paid hosting platform that Automattic operates, is more of a "hacked up, bastardized simulacra of WordPress’s GPL code". By default you can only load a subset of themes or plugins and only if you choose the Business plan or higher. This seems like a bigger issue than having revisions turned off with a WordPress-provided setting. It also seems a bit rich to be offering a product using the GPL license and then being upset that people make changes to it?
- nchmy 2y ago
  Its not about revision history. That's just one of 429 contradictory reasons that matt has given for why he's doing this. Dont take ANYTHING that guy says at face value - he's a psychopath Youre absolutely right though - WP dot com is by far the worst offender of his own standards.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    at some point the disagreement about revision history will be settled through revisionist history
  - AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
    Revision history is the only fig leaf here though about wp-engine being "bastardized wordpress" ? I suppose I understand the argument about wp-engine using significant wordpress.org resources has some merit (but is entirely unrelated to the bastardization argument) if wp-engine is just fetching things like wordpress updates and plugin lists and plugin updates, etc, all directly from wordpress.org servers on a per-blog basis but I find it hard to believe that wp-engine doesn't cache or have their own layer for that.

i_am_jl 2y ago

WordPress doesn't like products/orgs that offer services related to WordPress using "WP" in their name to imply affiliation with WordPress. WordPress has recently updated their terms of use to reflect this. Matt is also on record criticizing WP Engine for never having donated to the WordPress Foundation. This is all coming to light after the breakdown of licensing negotiations between Automattic and WPEngine EDIT: https://www.therepository.email/mullenweg-threatens-corporate-takeover-of-wp-engine https://www.therepository.email/mullenweg-threatens-corporat...

unsnap_biceps 2y ago
This is a bit of after the fact complaining. Matt invested in WPEngine for many years and it was a-okay then for them to use WP, and in fact WP's own terms said WP was a free to use term for everyone. That was only changed when the legal squabbles started. The main legal issues are around using "WordPress" and "WooCommerce"
FireBeyond 2y ago
> Matt is also on record criticizing WP Engine for never having donated to the WordPress Foundation. Donate, perhaps. Sponsor? The Foundation event where Matt "went nuclear" last month was sponsored by WP Engine to the tune of $75,000. And was one of many donations this year. (Adding insult to injury, the "independent" Foundation banned WP Engine from attending the event they were sponsoring... because they were in dispute with Automattic.)
- dylan604 2y ago
  There's a difference between sponsoring an event and donating to the operations of the core project. I know nothing about the specifics on the event, but I've done events where $75,000 would almost cover the cost of the stage. I've also seen events where the cost of the event was covered by sponsors many times over.
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    There is. But Matt's BS "They've done nothing for WordPress but leech and freeload and give back nothing to the community" is patently false. Don't even start me on how "President of the WordPress Foundation, Matt Mullenweg", accepted their sponsorship check and then disinvited them from the event because they were in a conflict with "President of Automattic, Matt Mullenweg", and wouldn't even return the sponsorship check. In essence, if nothing else, that makes it a donation, because they sponsored the event, but got nothing for their sponsorship except knowing they... uhh... contributed to the community.
  - lsaferite 2y ago
    The foundation doesn't even contribute to core development anyway. Check out their yearly financial reports. In Matt's world, the only 'donation' that would directly support development would be to the commercial entity Automatic who is a direct competitor.
ceejayoz 2y ago
> WordPress has recently updated their terms of use to reflect this. That’s… a very odd way of portraying this. The policy, for like a decade, was: “The abbreviation “WP” is not covered by the WordPress trademarks and you are free to use it in any way you see fit.” https://www.reddit.com/r/Wordpress/comments/1foknoq/the_wordpress_foundation_trademark_policy_was/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Wordpress/comments/1foknoq/the_word...
- i_am_jl 2y ago
  Sure, allow me to clarify. Matt voices a number of grievances including WP Engine's changes to WordPress, their use of the term "WP", their donation/sponsorships, and more. At first glance they all seem a bit silly. The important context, in my opinion, is that this comes after the breakdown of a licensing agreement between WP Engine and Automattic, an agreement that would've seen tens of millions of dollars paid to Automattic by WP Engine for a license that WP Engine does not think they need. To put a point on it, none of the things WP Engine is accused of doing were problematic before the breakdown of licensing negotiations or the filing of WP Engine's lawsuit.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    But they explicitly say, and have for years, that “WP” can be used by anyone for any purpose. You can’t turn around and try to enforce that.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - i_am_jl 2y ago
      >But they explicitly say, and have for years, that “WP” can be used by anyone for any purpose. >You can’t turn around and try to enforce that. I'm not sure what you mean. WordPress is quite clearly turning around and trying to enforce that. It's a shakedown, the whole point is to force WP Engine back into licensing talks. A bulletproof legal foundation isn't necessary, just a legitimate complaint that can force WP Engine into court.

unsnap_biceps 2y ago

Per https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine-banned/ https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine-banned/ and https://x.com/photomatt/status/1838502185879167069 https://x.com/photomatt/status/1838502185879167069 I believe that WPEngine disabling the admin news feed that displayed his posts directly to WPEngine's customers was the tipping point for calling it a hacked up, bastardized simulacra

rahkiin 2y ago
That was after he made a personal post hating on WPEngine show up on all dashboard of all WPEngine customers. I read the revisions are often turned off as they cause major issues with database performance. It is a standard feature of wordpress too but them turning it off by default triggered matt
EFreethought 2y ago
I run a couple of WP instances on a shared hosting service (not WPEngine), and honestly I have no need for the admin news feed. If I knew how to turn it off I would. That is a weird thing to get upset about.
- dylan604 2y ago
  Is it? I don't know Matt, but it sounds just like Musk forcing his feeds to the top of everyone, or everyone forced to being Tom's friend.
  - unsnap_biceps 2y ago
    I think the key difference is that Twitter or MySpace wasn't GPL software. Matt is complaining that someone modified "his" GPL software, as the license he's using grants them the privilege to do.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      I was referring to the admin news portion being forced upon everyone, not the state of code availability

tedivm 2y ago

Honestly this seems like Matt just wants WP Engine to give him a ton of money, and when they refused his extortion he threw a temper tantrum and abused his dual lead as head of Wordpress.com (the commercial wordpress) and Wordpress.org (the supposedly independent foundation). The lawsuit that WPEngine filed against Automatic and Matt specifically is a hell of a read. https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Complaint-WP-Engine-v-Automattic-et-al.pdf https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Complaint-WP...

lsaferite 2y ago
The foundation isn't even 'wordpress.org', it's 'wordpressfoundation.org'. The 'wordpress.org' site is wholly owned and managed by Matt (using Automatic resources from what he's said). So, it's not just his dual role, it's his triple role.

GavinAnderegg 2y ago

It's about revision history, as Matt laid out here: https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine/ https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine/ However, disabling revision history is a setting offered as part of WordPress: https://wordpress.org/documentation/article/revisions/#revision-options https://wordpress.org/documentation/article/revisions/#revis... I'd argue that WordPress.com, the paid hosting platform that Automattic operates, is more of a "hacked up, bastardized simulacra of WordPress’s GPL code". By default you can only load a subset of themes or plugins and only if you choose the Business plan or higher. This seems like a bigger issue than having revisions turned off with a WordPress-provided setting. It also seems a bit rich to be offering a product using the GPL license and then being upset that people make changes to it?

nchmy 2y ago
Its not about revision history. That's just one of 429 contradictory reasons that matt has given for why he's doing this. Dont take ANYTHING that guy says at face value - he's a psychopath Youre absolutely right though - WP dot com is by far the worst offender of his own standards.
- dylan604 2y ago
  at some point the disagreement about revision history will be settled through revisionist history
- AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
  Revision history is the only fig leaf here though about wp-engine being "bastardized wordpress" ? I suppose I understand the argument about wp-engine using significant wordpress.org resources has some merit (but is entirely unrelated to the bastardization argument) if wp-engine is just fetching things like wordpress updates and plugin lists and plugin updates, etc, all directly from wordpress.org servers on a per-blog basis but I find it hard to believe that wp-engine doesn't cache or have their own layer for that.