18 ms·

WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction

433 points by kbarmettler 2y ago

minimaxir 2y ago
Yes, they did use Matt's Hacker News comments against him. (p24) The more relevant outcome of WPEngine getting the injuction is in Section F (p40), which includes removing that WordPress login checkbox.
- talldayo 2y ago
  I feel like photomatt's comments are going to be enshrined in the same way the Dropbox one was. He talked up such a huge game but everyone knew he was in the wrong - we need to intercept cocky executives before they incriminate themselves in media res.
  - kbarmettler 2y ago
    I agree if we're talking from the perspective of his lawyers. From the wordpress community perspective, I think we benefited from Matt's extraordinary outspokenness here. It made all the bad acts very easy to bullet point in this injunction!
    - barthvr 2y ago
      Maybe he'll have to step back like Linus had a few years ago. And maybe give the wp.org domain ownership to the Foundation, making WP a bit more reliable and resilient to one's actions.
      - nchmy 2y ago
        That wouldn't change anything - he IS the foundation.
  - speckx 2y ago
    Curious as to what was the Dropbox comment? Can you please share or link? Thanks!
    - lolinder 2y ago
      Congrats, you're one of today's lucky 10000: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 Also worth reading the poster's follow-up years later and the ensuing discussion. Graeme's observation about the significance of the comment is super important: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824
      - RainyDayTmrw 2y ago
        And in case anyone needs it, the 10,000 number is referencing this: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
      - dang 2y ago
        Time for another episode of "The Case for 9224" (not criticizing you! it's just my hobby, apparently) That comment has gotten a bum rap over the years. The commenter was trying to be helpful with Dropbox's YC application (that's what "app" meant on HN in 2007). Back then, file synchronization was widely thought to be a solution-in-search-of-a-problem. I've been trying for years to get people to understand this (starting at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23229275 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23229275, then https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20brandonm&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...), even though I know you can't argue with the internet. The comment only became infamous years later [1, 2], after Dropbox was clearly a success—so this is a case of hindsight. If people would only read all three comments, instead of stopping at the first, they'd see that the exchange was pleasant and successful [3]. But a meme is more fun. It didn't exist, so it had to be invented! [4] Compare that with the other infamous-HN-comment-from-2007, "did you win the Putnam" [5], which got pilloried in real time. No hindsight fallacy there! If the hivemind had empathy (which alas it does not), people would stop to consider how they'd feel about getting publicly mocked over decades for something they posted with good intentions at age 22 [6]. Alas, this is how the internet works—not much we can do about it. It's amazing, though, what a good sport BrandonM has been about it all this time. That part of the story is actually real, so we should celebrate that too. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6138488 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6138488 (August 2013, i.e. 6 years later) seems to be the earliest reference on HN itself. [2] April 5, 2007: "Show HN, Dropbox" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6625306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6625306 (Oct 2013) [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9272 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9272 from Drew, and then https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9479 [4] https://www.whitman.edu/VSA/trois.imposteurs.html https://www.whitman.edu/VSA/trois.imposteurs.html [5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079, but don't miss the witty and graceful concession (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35350 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35350) [6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824
  - fabianhjr 2y ago
    > we need to intercept cocky executives before they incriminate themselves in media res. Please don't, just let them. Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.
    - browningstreet 2y ago
      There’s a community of users to think about… I think Matt needs to be replaced, and while the “what” may be arguable, he loses hard on the “how”.
      - toomuchtodo 2y ago
        These people care little of the potential consequences, they operate from a particular mental model in that regard [1]. The harm will be done. When they swan dive from a reputational and legal perspective, step back and the problem solves itself. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42371295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42371295
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - Brian_K_White 2y ago
    Why intercept them? I don't want douchebags like that to succeed in their douchebaggery. I want them to mouth off.
- unsnap_biceps 2y ago
  Matt hasn't commented here in 57 days. I wonder what changed from, paraphrased, my lawyer okayed this communication[1] and now. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41726961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41726961
  - legitster 2y ago
    https://ma.tt/2024/10/first-amendment/ https://ma.tt/2024/10/first-amendment/ The lawyer thing was hilarious. Someone actually claiming to be his lawyer was on the HN threads and anytime he was asked a question the response was a version of "Oh, I hadn't heard about this. I can't answer that."
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - minimaxir 2y ago
      > After this post, I will refrain from personally commenting on the WP Engine case until a judge rules on the injunction. Well, a judge did indeed rule on the injuction. He just retweeted this tweet about the case: https://x.com/brian_essig/status/1866640985842692452 https://x.com/brian_essig/status/1866640985842692452 > This is actually bullshit. Agree with him or not, the court is forcing an open source maintainer into providing services to a user. What’s next, a company finds a bug and a court orders a maintainer to fix it?
      - smsm42 2y ago
        That's not an accurate description. An accurate description is that the court is ordering an open source maintainer to stop treating one particular user in a hostile and exclusionary manner. Now, you can object to that too, but there's a serious difference. It's like fixing a bug, but intentionally excluding some particular user from getting the bug fix - it's not the same as fixing a bug. Fixing a bug anew requires additional work, and forcing somebody in un-contracted work is usually hard. Allowing a user to access the bug fix everybody else can access requires just stopping being a jerk, no surprise the court is much more willing to grant such kind of relief.
- Havoc 2y ago
  Pretty sure everyone except Matt saw that one coming
tmsh 2y ago
[flagged]
- lolinder 2y ago
  Oof. This comment originally had an introduction attributing the summary to Claude and immediately got downvoted to oblivion. Now it's been edited to remove the attribution and it's resurrected (edit: gone again, so ignore me). Unintended perverse incentives...
  - semiquaver 2y ago
    FWIW, I (a human) read the order and this is a pretty accurate summary.
    - lolinder 2y ago
      I did as well and yes, it's fine. This is just a meta comment about what we're accidentally training people to do, not a critique of OP.
    - PKop 2y ago
      Why is this relevant? Who want's "summaries" in the comments? We can all copy and paste ourselves, so spamming this nonsense is useless.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - jcranmer 2y ago
    Even without the attribution, it was still pretty clear to me that it was a chatbot-generated summary. No human who understands how the legal procedure works would introduce the summary in that way, as the court order is the preliminary injunction.
    - aspenmayer 2y ago
      Even without the attribution, generated comments are against HN guidelines.
legitster 2y ago
TL;DR: This is a huge verdict against Automattic. To get an injunction like this is a really high bar - you have to prove that you have a winnable case AND that you/the public is actively being harmed right now and it can't wait until trial. The injunction covers almost everything relevant - returning ACF, taking down the website tracker, removing the checkbox, etc. Basically return everything as it was before Matt became a supervillain the day of Wordcamp.
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  This is a huge sign that the case against Matt is a slam dunk. The writing in injunctions like this is indicative of the court's thinking based on the pleadings, and they have basically regurgitated the complaint while adding on more evidence from Matt being an ass on social media, which suggests that the judge has a strong preference.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  Right - not just a preliminary injunction but basically the Court dismisses basically every argument put forth by Automattic in all even claims as "not withstanding scrutiny", "not supported by evidence", and "a consequence of their own actions". Throughout the document, there is -very- little that says Automattic's defense to any of this has any substance.
- DannyBee 2y ago
  Uh, yeah, and in fact, the judge found likelihood of success on the tortuious interference claim which basically never happens, and so didn't bother to deal with the unfair competition part. That's remarkably bad for Automattic - tortuious interference is often a throwaway claim. The judge here clearly does not think much of Automattic's positions. I wonder if Neal found the merit yet[1]. [1] https://automattic.com/2024/10/03/meritless/ https://automattic.com/2024/10/03/meritless/
  - flootz 2y ago
    I don't know if Neal has found the merit yet, but Automattic seems to be losing their company lawyers at a pace of one per week since a couple of months ago. That seems a pretty good indicator of where the legal department of the company sees things going towards.
jcranmer 2y ago
> Here, Mullenweg’s “statement that he had the right to disable WPEngine’s account access and to make changes to the ACF plugin for the sake of public safety[,]” see Opp. at 27-28, is belied by the declarations of WPEngine’s executives stating that the claimed vulnerability was minor [...] @photomatt literally screwed himself over by talking about his actions here, when everyone was screaming at him to shut the fuck up. Will he start listening now? In short, what this injunction does is a) remove the checkbox, b) return ACF to WPEngine, c) restore access to website, d) no bond required.
- dylan604 2y ago
  [flagged]
- neilv 2y ago
  [flagged]
- chris_wot 2y ago
  I'm not sure how many people (including myself) told him to stop talking about the case on Hacker News. He never listened.
  - mikae1 2y ago
    Wasn't it good that he kept talking though? Sorry for being crass, but I'd prefer him loosing this case.
    - chris_wot 2y ago
      Agreed.
      - kristofferR 2y ago
        But that's a weird thing to do. Why advise people to do stuff detrimental to the world?
bravetraveler 2y ago
Tried to get bond for an amount covering bills for two years; lol. This gives me more hope than most things I've read lately
- bawolff 2y ago
  Makes you wonder if they really thought that would work. I guess it never hurts to shoot for the moon.
  - bravetraveler 2y ago
    +1, something about landing among the stars. I think Matt wanted to be one; this had a very astroturf feel - making himself the champion... and now, lol. But I repeat myself!
- digitalPhonix 2y ago
  I sort of wish the court did a hand wavy estimate of the marginal cost of providing service to WPEngine (Automattic was claiming the bond was to cover the cost of service) and ordered a bond of something like $0.01
  - jcranmer 2y ago
    This is the preliminary injunction, which needs to be issued relatively quickly to preserve the status quo for the litigation, so the court isn't going to ask for anything it doesn't already have. Automattic only asked for covering the total cost of website hosting, which was clearly too high, so the court didn't have sufficient information to be able to make any reasonable estimate.
rglover 2y ago
Rooted in speculation about why this meltdown occurred in the first place: be very careful about taking money, as well as the amount and who from. My guess from day one is that Matt was put under pressure from investors and this was the only "fix" he saw. A real shame to see such a great legacy flushed for zero ROI.
- lolinder 2y ago
  I've often wondered if his emphasis on how private equity was ruining WordPress was him telegraphing his frustration with his own investors at Black Rock while technically abiding by his contract with them. It's interesting to consider that his performance could have been a type of malicious compliance with their demands—going so far overboard that he intentionally destroys the whole ecosystem as a kind of revenge. It's probably more likely he just went nuts, but it's fun as a head canon.
  - bravetraveler 2y ago
    As amusing as that thought is... I think he could have done that without misrepresenting [the 'contracts' of] open source software so readily. He stood to gain from this little knife twist, we all may still lose. Who knows what misconceptions were born/the downstream effects. WPEngine was never under any obligation to Matt himself/Automattic/WordPress/the Foundation [whatever distinction - if any - that may offer!]... outside of the license. I don't believe it's a question of distance overboard, it started there! To quote Kendrick: "colonizer"
  - legitster 2y ago
    > his own investors at Black Rock Blackrock does not at all operate the same as a private equity and it's a huge pet peeve of mine when people lump them in together. Usually they are confusing Blackrock with Blackstone. All Blackrock does is manage wealth and investments on behalf of individual clients. One of the ways they do this is by sticking private assets into funds for their clients. It's more akin to Vanguard than anything to do with private equity. There's no reason to believe BlackRock would be breathing down their necks when all they do is broker the funds on behalf of their clients. Automattic DOES have private equity backers though like Tiger Global, Insight, ICONIQ, and more.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sureIy 2y ago
[flagged]
pessimizer 2y ago
I think this is fair. I think wordpress had every right to cut WPEngine off, but 1) the fact that subbing in his fork of their plugin killed already purchased "pro" user features without warning was an illegitimate attack on the "pro" customers themselves (who probably have a case against him personally), 2) the pretense that he was doing it for "security reasons" because there was an exploit (every single part of everything about wordpress has an exploit in a random month) shows that he thought he was doing something unjustifiable; he should have been clear and open about why he was forking, and not do anything that broke people's installs, and 3) the behind-the-scenes harassment was just over the top. He should have just made his demand, and when they turned it down, sent a follow up explaining how he was going to cut off access so they could coordinate doing it cleanly. Instead he was intentionally optimizing for chaos and saying this in private communications over and over again. He could have done almost all of the same things, and just refused to update "pro" users to the fork and instead refer them to WPEngine's alternative setup. Instead he ranted and raved ominously behind the scenes, trying to make it as clear as possible that this was extortion when in essence it wasn't. It was all of the fake snarkiness in public and in private, attempts to poach employees, threats to destroy the company, and insinuations of security problems that made it extortion. WPE is going to win this because Mullenweg seemingly has no ability to emotionally self-regulate. Real teenage swatter vibes. And I think he was in the right, and I think that without all of the crap, they'd probably have backed down and started contributing. They'll probably end up getting a remedy where he has to help them set up and maintain their alternative plugin directory, he might have to pay them damages, and he might even end up having to allow everyone use of the mark freely. Then what does he have? He snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  > the pretense that he was doing it for "security reasons" because there was an exploit (every single part of everything about wordpress has an exploit in a random month) shows that he thought he was doing something unjustifiable Not to mention the threats posted online to other plugin developers, "we can and will find an exploit in your plugin and do exactly the same to you if we want" indicated it had very little to do with security. I'm sure he had Automattic employees pulled onto finding even the most trivial of exploits just to be able to do this. > they'd probably have backed down and started contributing WPE contributes probably in the seven digit a year range to WP. The very conference that Matt went "nuclear" at was sponsored by WPE to the tune of $75K (and for insult on injury, they were denied the ability to attend, and I believe all references to them were removed, but the money was kept).
snowwrestler 2y ago
I hope Matt considers placing all the community resources of Wordpress into the foundation, including Wordpress.org, constituting an actual board, contributing funds, and setting up a governance and contribution system that matches the open ethos of the license and community. I think this is an area that Drupal gets right, and Dries wrote an interesting post about it in October: https://dri.es/solving-the-maker-taker-problem https://dri.es/solving-the-maker-taker-problem
- recursivegirth 2y ago
  This is pretty on the nose considering Matt's latest blog post[1]. I feel for Matt in some regard, and I do think the lawsuit sets a precedent that OSS developers are required to provide software with warranty. However, I say that with not fully understanding the seperation of actions between Automattic the company and Matt in his own personal capacity. [1] https://ma.tt/2024/12/drupalcon-singapore/ https://ma.tt/2024/12/drupalcon-singapore/
  - duskwuff 2y ago
    > I do think the lawsuit sets a precedent that OSS developers are required to provide software with warranty 1) This is a preliminary injunction, not a decision. An injunction which resets a situation to the former status quo pending a decision isn't all that unusual. 2) I don't think the issue here is so much a "warranty" as much as that Automattic (et al) set out to discriminate against WPEngine to obtain a business advantage. If Automattic wanted to shut down the WordPress plugin repository entirely, they'd be within their rights to do so. (It'd be business suicide, of course - but the point is that they could.)
    - sidewndr46 2y ago
      Given that OSS litigation typically spans decades an injunction might as well be a decision
      - lolinder 2y ago
ivraatiems 2y ago
As much as the US justice system is deeply, deeply flawed, it is one of the few places where very wealthy people ever hit the "find out" stage after fucking around. Some recent examples, apart from this case, certainly include SBF going to prison, Elon Musk being forced to buy Twitter, Alex Jones' enormous civil judgment, and so on. I'm not saying I have faith in the system, exactly, especially when it tends to only do this at the behest of other very wealthy people demanding it, but it is nice to see. Matt Mullenweg, if you're reading this (and we know you read HN), feel free to not listen to your attorneys and continue to attack random individuals and companies randomly because you decide you don't like them, or whatever. It will surely end well for you and definitely not with more massive own goals like this one. (And if you are Matt Mullenweg's attorney, and reading this because he decided to follow my bad advice instead of your good advice, well, I'm happy to take a steak dinner in appreciation of the massive bill you'll soon be sending him.)
- tofof 2y ago
  Alex Jones' loss of infowars has been rejected by the judge, who seems intent on handing it to the assets Jones transferred to his parents to shield them instead. You might want to reevaluate.
  - ivraatiems 2y ago
    That's not an accurate description of what happened, and in any case, I was referring to the massive approximately $1 billion judgement against Jones, which isn't going anywhere regardless.
- anonymousab 2y ago
  Matt's attorney - or someone claiming to be him - was saying that Matt is in the right and everything he's posted since the start was cleared by him. On here and on Twitter. That jives with Matt's claims that his lawyers were on board with all of his nonsense (and now, probably legally incriminating!) posts. But it could also have just been someone LARPing.
  - 2y ago
ookblah 2y ago
I stopped following it for a bit after the initial drama after Matt had repeated meltdowns and showed his true face in all of this. It was just tiring try to fight all the non-stop gaslighting which was probably part of the strategy. Any leg he had to stand on was betrayed by his tantrums. Good to see some movement.
chris_wot 2y ago
> Defendants’ arguments in opposition do not persuade otherwise. They assert that “[t]he public is not, and will not, be subject to any harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction” noting that WPEngine implemented a workaround for Mullenweg’s interference with its access to WordPress. Opp. at 33. Not so. In his reply declaration, Prabhakar explains that the temporary solution “is impractical for many reasons.” Prabhakar Reply Decl. ¶ 4. Without access to wordpress.org, those who use WPEngine’s plugins “would not know that their plugins require update[.]” Id. Many do not know how to update plugins manually. Id. For those that do, if they manage several websites, and those websites run multiple plugins, the process of performing manual updates would be too onerous and time consuming to be workable. Id. Moreover, even if WPEngine’s workaround did not present the difficulties Prabhakar describes, the costs associated with its implementation, as necessitated by Mullenweg’s conduct, supports the issuance of injunctive relief. Ouch. The court is basically saying that they need to implement the preliminary injunction for the wider public good. Rather puts the lie to several assertions by Mullenweg. In fact, it's not at all looking good for Mullenweg or Automattic.
vikrantrathore 2y ago
[flagged]
valunord 2y ago
It feels as if Automattic doesn't do a complete paradigm shift and become truly open with their software everyone is going to give up on them entirely - at least everyone with significant talent and investment.
- anon7000 2y ago
  I agree with you that Automattic needs a paradigm shift (massive leadership change, probably), but I don’t think the openness of their software is the problem. Just because they have a huge number of OSS projects. Most of it is open source, even things that really don’t see 3rd party contributions (like https://github.com/Automattic/vip-go-mu-plugins https://github.com/Automattic/vip-go-mu-plugins, https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso, https://github.com/Automattic/redvelvet-lib https://github.com/Automattic/redvelvet-lib, https://github.com/Automattic/newspack-plugin https://github.com/Automattic/newspack-plugin, https://github.com/Automattic/pocket-casts-ios https://github.com/Automattic/pocket-casts-ios) Automattic has other issues (leadership, especially!!) but software development happens largely in the open. Just look at the GH issues and PRs in the WP-calypso and Gutenberg repositories, and you’ll see even a lot of technical discussion and planning happening completely public. You can even chime in if you want :) Automattic has lots of issues. But they simply have much more open software development practices than nearly any other tech company (most of which are completely private and closed source). I just don’t think this is the core problem.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
ggbnyikg 2y ago
[flagged]
- ChocolateGod 2y ago
  [flagged]
throw646577 2y ago
Ehh. I speak as a pretty long-term WP-oriented developer who is no fan of WP Engine for reasons that are defined by having used their product when I say: This was the only sensible and just outcome. The "Secure Custom Fields" thing is one of the most egregious things to happen in open source for at least a decade. Just crazy. Hopefully Matt understands he has become self-limiting and steps back from some of his positions/takes off one of his too many hats.
anonymousab 2y ago
> restoring WPEngine’s and Related Entities’ access to wordpress.org in the > ... > slack.wordpress.org); and That is going to be a very awkward slack channel.
RegnisGnaw 2y ago
Anyone taking bets if he will obey the injunction? My feeling is that his ego will not let him do so.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  That's a good way to find that judges also have fairly hefty egos, and the ability to jail you for impacting it.
  - barkingcat 2y ago
    I'm taking bets matt will just do a "I bet you my ego is bigger" and end up going to jail for contempt of court for 10 years. And then the day he gets out he'll continue the feud.
    - echoangle 2y ago
      More like 10 days, contempt of court starts small and only accumulates if you keep doing it. I think he would get the message after the first time. But he’s got lawyers, there’s about 1% chance he’s going to jail for that.
spankalee 2y ago
Can anyone here summarize the legal principle involved here? Why does Matt legally have to provide services to people he doesn't want to, even if he's morally wrong or generally being an asshole? To my non-lawyer and only-watching-from-the-sidelines self, the ACF situation seems more clearly actionable, but the other things are very interesting.
- crowcroft 2y ago
  I get the impression this injunction is really just saying that WPEngine's legal case has some veracity, and Automattic's actions seem to be retaliatory and/or not legal (depending on the eventual outcome of the actual case), and so is saying everything needs to be set back to where it was, while the courts work through an actual legal decision.
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  It's not a long document, but to take one of the example torts mentioned: torturous interference with a business contract is illegal, even if you own the means of interfering. Could matt/automattic/wordpress.org/wordpress.com (they all act as the same entity: matt) have withdrawn services in a way that didn't tortiously interfere with a business contract? Of course. But he didn't, because tortiously interfering with WPEngine's customer contracts was his primary goal. His complaints about cost were secondary at best, and seem to have been entirely a pretext. To add more perspective: withdrawing services from everybody usually requires one to simply stop working and/or paying bills. To withdraw services from WPEngine, matt had to consciously expend time/effort/money, just to interfere with WPEngine's customer contracts. Doing nothing would have been less work and cost matt less.
- sonofhans 2y ago
  “Tortious interference” is wrongful interference in others’ contractual or business relationships. Wordpress does not have to provide free services to anyone in particular, only to honor their legal agreements and treat their users equally. In this case they did not; they took action specifically to damage WPEngine. Matt may even be morally correct in some ways, but that doesn’t give him the right to use his position as Wordpress leader to damage the business of someone who competes with Automattic.
lesuorac 2y ago
> remove the purported list of WPEngine customers contained in the “domains.csv” file linked to Defendants’ wordpressenginetracker.com website (which was launched on or about November 7, 2024) and stored in the associated GitHub repository located at https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetracker.github.io https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetra.... Considering the only changes [1] [2] have been to add more sites to the list I guess there's going to be a second hearing to enforce the injunction. [1]: https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetracker.github.io/commits/trunk/ https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetra... [2]: https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetracker.github.io/commit/4c2848fc940c3b58ff76bffbade286fa887a3cff https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetra...
- Crosseye_Jack 2y ago
  > Within 72 hours, Defendants are ORDERED to: So they can add sites to the tracker GH right up to the 71 hour, then remove it and still be in compliance with the order. edit: as the WPEngine checkbox has been removed from https://login.wordpress.org/ https://login.wordpress.org/ since the order, I don't see why they won't also follow the order regrading the site tracker.
- rnewme 2y ago
  Removed 5min ago hmmmhm
dzonga 2y ago
matt is one of those inspirational people - like dhh, jason cohen people who built products from scratch and bootstrapped them. so it's sad seeing him go ape shit like that.
- uncomplexity_ 2y ago
  - https://ma.tt/2024/10/on-dhh/ https://ma.tt/2024/10/on-dhh/ - https://x.com/dhh/status/1845887043748221421 https://x.com/dhh/status/1845887043748221421 awful

433 points by kbarmettler 2y ago

Yes, they did use Matt's Hacker News comments against him. (p24) The more relevant outcome of WPEngine getting the injuction is in Section F (p40), which includes removing that WordPress login checkbox.

talldayo 2y ago
I feel like photomatt's comments are going to be enshrined in the same way the Dropbox one was. He talked up such a huge game but everyone knew he was in the wrong - we need to intercept cocky executives before they incriminate themselves in media res.
- kbarmettler 2y ago
  I agree if we're talking from the perspective of his lawyers. From the wordpress community perspective, I think we benefited from Matt's extraordinary outspokenness here. It made all the bad acts very easy to bullet point in this injunction!
  - barthvr 2y ago
    Maybe he'll have to step back like Linus had a few years ago. And maybe give the wp.org domain ownership to the Foundation, making WP a bit more reliable and resilient to one's actions.
    - nchmy 2y ago
      That wouldn't change anything - he IS the foundation.
- speckx 2y ago
  Curious as to what was the Dropbox comment? Can you please share or link? Thanks!
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Congrats, you're one of today's lucky 10000: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 Also worth reading the poster's follow-up years later and the ensuing discussion. Graeme's observation about the significance of the comment is super important: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824
    - RainyDayTmrw 2y ago
      And in case anyone needs it, the 10,000 number is referencing this: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
    - dang 2y ago
      Time for another episode of "The Case for 9224" (not criticizing you! it's just my hobby, apparently) That comment has gotten a bum rap over the years. The commenter was trying to be helpful with Dropbox's YC application (that's what "app" meant on HN in 2007). Back then, file synchronization was widely thought to be a solution-in-search-of-a-problem. I've been trying for years to get people to understand this (starting at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23229275 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23229275, then https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20brandonm&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...), even though I know you can't argue with the internet. The comment only became infamous years later [1, 2], after Dropbox was clearly a success—so this is a case of hindsight. If people would only read all three comments, instead of stopping at the first, they'd see that the exchange was pleasant and successful [3]. But a meme is more fun. It didn't exist, so it had to be invented! [4] Compare that with the other infamous-HN-comment-from-2007, "did you win the Putnam" [5], which got pilloried in real time. No hindsight fallacy there! If the hivemind had empathy (which alas it does not), people would stop to consider how they'd feel about getting publicly mocked over decades for something they posted with good intentions at age 22 [6]. Alas, this is how the internet works—not much we can do about it. It's amazing, though, what a good sport BrandonM has been about it all this time. That part of the story is actually real, so we should celebrate that too. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6138488 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6138488 (August 2013, i.e. 6 years later) seems to be the earliest reference on HN itself. [2] April 5, 2007: "Show HN, Dropbox" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6625306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6625306 (Oct 2013) [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9272 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9272 from Drew, and then https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9479 [4] https://www.whitman.edu/VSA/trois.imposteurs.html https://www.whitman.edu/VSA/trois.imposteurs.html [5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079, but don't miss the witty and graceful concession (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35350 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35350) [6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16661824
- fabianhjr 2y ago
  > we need to intercept cocky executives before they incriminate themselves in media res. Please don't, just let them. Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.
  - browningstreet 2y ago
    There’s a community of users to think about… I think Matt needs to be replaced, and while the “what” may be arguable, he loses hard on the “how”.
    - toomuchtodo 2y ago
      These people care little of the potential consequences, they operate from a particular mental model in that regard [1]. The harm will be done. When they swan dive from a reputational and legal perspective, step back and the problem solves itself. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42371295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42371295
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  Why intercept them? I don't want douchebags like that to succeed in their douchebaggery. I want them to mouth off.
unsnap_biceps 2y ago
Matt hasn't commented here in 57 days. I wonder what changed from, paraphrased, my lawyer okayed this communication[1] and now. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41726961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41726961
- legitster 2y ago
  https://ma.tt/2024/10/first-amendment/ https://ma.tt/2024/10/first-amendment/ The lawyer thing was hilarious. Someone actually claiming to be his lawyer was on the HN threads and anytime he was asked a question the response was a version of "Oh, I hadn't heard about this. I can't answer that."
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - minimaxir 2y ago
    > After this post, I will refrain from personally commenting on the WP Engine case until a judge rules on the injunction. Well, a judge did indeed rule on the injuction. He just retweeted this tweet about the case: https://x.com/brian_essig/status/1866640985842692452 https://x.com/brian_essig/status/1866640985842692452 > This is actually bullshit. Agree with him or not, the court is forcing an open source maintainer into providing services to a user. What’s next, a company finds a bug and a court orders a maintainer to fix it?
    - smsm42 2y ago
      That's not an accurate description. An accurate description is that the court is ordering an open source maintainer to stop treating one particular user in a hostile and exclusionary manner. Now, you can object to that too, but there's a serious difference. It's like fixing a bug, but intentionally excluding some particular user from getting the bug fix - it's not the same as fixing a bug. Fixing a bug anew requires additional work, and forcing somebody in un-contracted work is usually hard. Allowing a user to access the bug fix everybody else can access requires just stopping being a jerk, no surprise the court is much more willing to grant such kind of relief.
Havoc 2y ago
Pretty sure everyone except Matt saw that one coming

tmsh 2y ago

[flagged]

lolinder 2y ago
Oof. This comment originally had an introduction attributing the summary to Claude and immediately got downvoted to oblivion. Now it's been edited to remove the attribution and it's resurrected (edit: gone again, so ignore me). Unintended perverse incentives...
- semiquaver 2y ago
  FWIW, I (a human) read the order and this is a pretty accurate summary.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    I did as well and yes, it's fine. This is just a meta comment about what we're accidentally training people to do, not a critique of OP.
  - PKop 2y ago
    Why is this relevant? Who want's "summaries" in the comments? We can all copy and paste ourselves, so spamming this nonsense is useless.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- jcranmer 2y ago
  Even without the attribution, it was still pretty clear to me that it was a chatbot-generated summary. No human who understands how the legal procedure works would introduce the summary in that way, as the court order is the preliminary injunction.
  - aspenmayer 2y ago
    Even without the attribution, generated comments are against HN guidelines.

legitster 2y ago

TL;DR: This is a huge verdict against Automattic. To get an injunction like this is a really high bar - you have to prove that you have a winnable case AND that you/the public is actively being harmed right now and it can't wait until trial. The injunction covers almost everything relevant - returning ACF, taking down the website tracker, removing the checkbox, etc. Basically return everything as it was before Matt became a supervillain the day of Wordcamp.

pclmulqdq 2y ago
This is a huge sign that the case against Matt is a slam dunk. The writing in injunctions like this is indicative of the court's thinking based on the pleadings, and they have basically regurgitated the complaint while adding on more evidence from Matt being an ass on social media, which suggests that the judge has a strong preference.
FireBeyond 2y ago
Right - not just a preliminary injunction but basically the Court dismisses basically every argument put forth by Automattic in all even claims as "not withstanding scrutiny", "not supported by evidence", and "a consequence of their own actions". Throughout the document, there is -very- little that says Automattic's defense to any of this has any substance.
DannyBee 2y ago
Uh, yeah, and in fact, the judge found likelihood of success on the tortuious interference claim which basically never happens, and so didn't bother to deal with the unfair competition part. That's remarkably bad for Automattic - tortuious interference is often a throwaway claim. The judge here clearly does not think much of Automattic's positions. I wonder if Neal found the merit yet[1]. [1] https://automattic.com/2024/10/03/meritless/ https://automattic.com/2024/10/03/meritless/
- flootz 2y ago
  I don't know if Neal has found the merit yet, but Automattic seems to be losing their company lawyers at a pace of one per week since a couple of months ago. That seems a pretty good indicator of where the legal department of the company sees things going towards.

jcranmer 2y ago

> Here, Mullenweg’s “statement that he had the right to disable WPEngine’s account access and to make changes to the ACF plugin for the sake of public safety[,]” see Opp. at 27-28, is belied by the declarations of WPEngine’s executives stating that the claimed vulnerability was minor [...] @photomatt literally screwed himself over by talking about his actions here, when everyone was screaming at him to shut the fuck up. Will he start listening now? In short, what this injunction does is a) remove the checkbox, b) return ACF to WPEngine, c) restore access to website, d) no bond required.

dylan604 2y ago
[flagged]
neilv 2y ago
[flagged]
chris_wot 2y ago
I'm not sure how many people (including myself) told him to stop talking about the case on Hacker News. He never listened.
- mikae1 2y ago
  Wasn't it good that he kept talking though? Sorry for being crass, but I'd prefer him loosing this case.
  - chris_wot 2y ago
    Agreed.
    - kristofferR 2y ago
      But that's a weird thing to do. Why advise people to do stuff detrimental to the world?

bravetraveler 2y ago

Tried to get bond for an amount covering bills for two years; lol. This gives me more hope than most things I've read lately

bawolff 2y ago
Makes you wonder if they really thought that would work. I guess it never hurts to shoot for the moon.
- bravetraveler 2y ago
  +1, something about landing among the stars. I think Matt wanted to be one; this had a very astroturf feel - making himself the champion... and now, lol. But I repeat myself!
digitalPhonix 2y ago
I sort of wish the court did a hand wavy estimate of the marginal cost of providing service to WPEngine (Automattic was claiming the bond was to cover the cost of service) and ordered a bond of something like $0.01
- jcranmer 2y ago
  This is the preliminary injunction, which needs to be issued relatively quickly to preserve the status quo for the litigation, so the court isn't going to ask for anything it doesn't already have. Automattic only asked for covering the total cost of website hosting, which was clearly too high, so the court didn't have sufficient information to be able to make any reasonable estimate.

rglover 2y ago

Rooted in speculation about why this meltdown occurred in the first place: be very careful about taking money, as well as the amount and who from. My guess from day one is that Matt was put under pressure from investors and this was the only "fix" he saw. A real shame to see such a great legacy flushed for zero ROI.

lolinder 2y ago
I've often wondered if his emphasis on how private equity was ruining WordPress was him telegraphing his frustration with his own investors at Black Rock while technically abiding by his contract with them. It's interesting to consider that his performance could have been a type of malicious compliance with their demands—going so far overboard that he intentionally destroys the whole ecosystem as a kind of revenge. It's probably more likely he just went nuts, but it's fun as a head canon.
- bravetraveler 2y ago
  As amusing as that thought is... I think he could have done that without misrepresenting [the 'contracts' of] open source software so readily. He stood to gain from this little knife twist, we all may still lose. Who knows what misconceptions were born/the downstream effects. WPEngine was never under any obligation to Matt himself/Automattic/WordPress/the Foundation [whatever distinction - if any - that may offer!]... outside of the license. I don't believe it's a question of distance overboard, it started there! To quote Kendrick: "colonizer"
- legitster 2y ago
  > his own investors at Black Rock Blackrock does not at all operate the same as a private equity and it's a huge pet peeve of mine when people lump them in together. Usually they are confusing Blackrock with Blackstone. All Blackrock does is manage wealth and investments on behalf of individual clients. One of the ways they do this is by sticking private assets into funds for their clients. It's more akin to Vanguard than anything to do with private equity. There's no reason to believe BlackRock would be breathing down their necks when all they do is broker the funds on behalf of their clients. Automattic DOES have private equity backers though like Tiger Global, Insight, ICONIQ, and more.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

sureIy 2y ago

[flagged]

pessimizer 2y ago

I think this is fair. I think wordpress had every right to cut WPEngine off, but 1) the fact that subbing in his fork of their plugin killed already purchased "pro" user features without warning was an illegitimate attack on the "pro" customers themselves (who probably have a case against him personally), 2) the pretense that he was doing it for "security reasons" because there was an exploit (every single part of everything about wordpress has an exploit in a random month) shows that he thought he was doing something unjustifiable; he should have been clear and open about why he was forking, and not do anything that broke people's installs, and 3) the behind-the-scenes harassment was just over the top. He should have just made his demand, and when they turned it down, sent a follow up explaining how he was going to cut off access so they could coordinate doing it cleanly. Instead he was intentionally optimizing for chaos and saying this in private communications over and over again. He could have done almost all of the same things, and just refused to update "pro" users to the fork and instead refer them to WPEngine's alternative setup. Instead he ranted and raved ominously behind the scenes, trying to make it as clear as possible that this was extortion when in essence it wasn't. It was all of the fake snarkiness in public and in private, attempts to poach employees, threats to destroy the company, and insinuations of security problems that made it extortion. WPE is going to win this because Mullenweg seemingly has no ability to emotionally self-regulate. Real teenage swatter vibes. And I think he was in the right, and I think that without all of the crap, they'd probably have backed down and started contributing. They'll probably end up getting a remedy where he has to help them set up and maintain their alternative plugin directory, he might have to pay them damages, and he might even end up having to allow everyone use of the mark freely. Then what does he have? He snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

FireBeyond 2y ago
> the pretense that he was doing it for "security reasons" because there was an exploit (every single part of everything about wordpress has an exploit in a random month) shows that he thought he was doing something unjustifiable Not to mention the threats posted online to other plugin developers, "we can and will find an exploit in your plugin and do exactly the same to you if we want" indicated it had very little to do with security. I'm sure he had Automattic employees pulled onto finding even the most trivial of exploits just to be able to do this. > they'd probably have backed down and started contributing WPE contributes probably in the seven digit a year range to WP. The very conference that Matt went "nuclear" at was sponsored by WPE to the tune of $75K (and for insult on injury, they were denied the ability to attend, and I believe all references to them were removed, but the money was kept).

snowwrestler 2y ago

I hope Matt considers placing all the community resources of Wordpress into the foundation, including Wordpress.org, constituting an actual board, contributing funds, and setting up a governance and contribution system that matches the open ethos of the license and community. I think this is an area that Drupal gets right, and Dries wrote an interesting post about it in October: https://dri.es/solving-the-maker-taker-problem https://dri.es/solving-the-maker-taker-problem

recursivegirth 2y ago
This is pretty on the nose considering Matt's latest blog post[1]. I feel for Matt in some regard, and I do think the lawsuit sets a precedent that OSS developers are required to provide software with warranty. However, I say that with not fully understanding the seperation of actions between Automattic the company and Matt in his own personal capacity. [1] https://ma.tt/2024/12/drupalcon-singapore/ https://ma.tt/2024/12/drupalcon-singapore/
- duskwuff 2y ago
  > I do think the lawsuit sets a precedent that OSS developers are required to provide software with warranty 1) This is a preliminary injunction, not a decision. An injunction which resets a situation to the former status quo pending a decision isn't all that unusual. 2) I don't think the issue here is so much a "warranty" as much as that Automattic (et al) set out to discriminate against WPEngine to obtain a business advantage. If Automattic wanted to shut down the WordPress plugin repository entirely, they'd be within their rights to do so. (It'd be business suicide, of course - but the point is that they could.)
  - sidewndr46 2y ago
    Given that OSS litigation typically spans decades an injunction might as well be a decision
    - lolinder 2y ago

ivraatiems 2y ago

As much as the US justice system is deeply, deeply flawed, it is one of the few places where very wealthy people ever hit the "find out" stage after fucking around. Some recent examples, apart from this case, certainly include SBF going to prison, Elon Musk being forced to buy Twitter, Alex Jones' enormous civil judgment, and so on. I'm not saying I have faith in the system, exactly, especially when it tends to only do this at the behest of other very wealthy people demanding it, but it is nice to see. Matt Mullenweg, if you're reading this (and we know you read HN), feel free to not listen to your attorneys and continue to attack random individuals and companies randomly because you decide you don't like them, or whatever. It will surely end well for you and definitely not with more massive own goals like this one. (And if you are Matt Mullenweg's attorney, and reading this because he decided to follow my bad advice instead of your good advice, well, I'm happy to take a steak dinner in appreciation of the massive bill you'll soon be sending him.)

tofof 2y ago
Alex Jones' loss of infowars has been rejected by the judge, who seems intent on handing it to the assets Jones transferred to his parents to shield them instead. You might want to reevaluate.
- ivraatiems 2y ago
  That's not an accurate description of what happened, and in any case, I was referring to the massive approximately $1 billion judgement against Jones, which isn't going anywhere regardless.
anonymousab 2y ago
Matt's attorney - or someone claiming to be him - was saying that Matt is in the right and everything he's posted since the start was cleared by him. On here and on Twitter. That jives with Matt's claims that his lawyers were on board with all of his nonsense (and now, probably legally incriminating!) posts. But it could also have just been someone LARPing.
- 2y ago

ookblah 2y ago

I stopped following it for a bit after the initial drama after Matt had repeated meltdowns and showed his true face in all of this. It was just tiring try to fight all the non-stop gaslighting which was probably part of the strategy. Any leg he had to stand on was betrayed by his tantrums. Good to see some movement.

chris_wot 2y ago

> Defendants’ arguments in opposition do not persuade otherwise. They assert that “[t]he public is not, and will not, be subject to any harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction” noting that WPEngine implemented a workaround for Mullenweg’s interference with its access to WordPress. Opp. at 33. Not so. In his reply declaration, Prabhakar explains that the temporary solution “is impractical for many reasons.” Prabhakar Reply Decl. ¶ 4. Without access to wordpress.org, those who use WPEngine’s plugins “would not know that their plugins require update[.]” Id. Many do not know how to update plugins manually. Id. For those that do, if they manage several websites, and those websites run multiple plugins, the process of performing manual updates would be too onerous and time consuming to be workable. Id. Moreover, even if WPEngine’s workaround did not present the difficulties Prabhakar describes, the costs associated with its implementation, as necessitated by Mullenweg’s conduct, supports the issuance of injunctive relief. Ouch. The court is basically saying that they need to implement the preliminary injunction for the wider public good. Rather puts the lie to several assertions by Mullenweg. In fact, it's not at all looking good for Mullenweg or Automattic.

vikrantrathore 2y ago

[flagged]

valunord 2y ago

It feels as if Automattic doesn't do a complete paradigm shift and become truly open with their software everyone is going to give up on them entirely - at least everyone with significant talent and investment.

anon7000 2y ago
I agree with you that Automattic needs a paradigm shift (massive leadership change, probably), but I don’t think the openness of their software is the problem. Just because they have a huge number of OSS projects. Most of it is open source, even things that really don’t see 3rd party contributions (like https://github.com/Automattic/vip-go-mu-plugins https://github.com/Automattic/vip-go-mu-plugins, https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso, https://github.com/Automattic/redvelvet-lib https://github.com/Automattic/redvelvet-lib, https://github.com/Automattic/newspack-plugin https://github.com/Automattic/newspack-plugin, https://github.com/Automattic/pocket-casts-ios https://github.com/Automattic/pocket-casts-ios) Automattic has other issues (leadership, especially!!) but software development happens largely in the open. Just look at the GH issues and PRs in the WP-calypso and Gutenberg repositories, and you’ll see even a lot of technical discussion and planning happening completely public. You can even chime in if you want :) Automattic has lots of issues. But they simply have much more open software development practices than nearly any other tech company (most of which are completely private and closed source). I just don’t think this is the core problem.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

ggbnyikg 2y ago

[flagged]

ChocolateGod 2y ago
[flagged]

throw646577 2y ago

Ehh. I speak as a pretty long-term WP-oriented developer who is no fan of WP Engine for reasons that are defined by having used their product when I say: This was the only sensible and just outcome. The "Secure Custom Fields" thing is one of the most egregious things to happen in open source for at least a decade. Just crazy. Hopefully Matt understands he has become self-limiting and steps back from some of his positions/takes off one of his too many hats.

anonymousab 2y ago

> restoring WPEngine’s and Related Entities’ access to wordpress.org in the > ... > slack.wordpress.org); and That is going to be a very awkward slack channel.

RegnisGnaw 2y ago

Anyone taking bets if he will obey the injunction? My feeling is that his ego will not let him do so.

ceejayoz 2y ago
That's a good way to find that judges also have fairly hefty egos, and the ability to jail you for impacting it.
- barkingcat 2y ago
  I'm taking bets matt will just do a "I bet you my ego is bigger" and end up going to jail for contempt of court for 10 years. And then the day he gets out he'll continue the feud.
  - echoangle 2y ago
    More like 10 days, contempt of court starts small and only accumulates if you keep doing it. I think he would get the message after the first time. But he’s got lawyers, there’s about 1% chance he’s going to jail for that.

spankalee 2y ago

Can anyone here summarize the legal principle involved here? Why does Matt legally have to provide services to people he doesn't want to, even if he's morally wrong or generally being an asshole? To my non-lawyer and only-watching-from-the-sidelines self, the ACF situation seems more clearly actionable, but the other things are very interesting.

crowcroft 2y ago
I get the impression this injunction is really just saying that WPEngine's legal case has some veracity, and Automattic's actions seem to be retaliatory and/or not legal (depending on the eventual outcome of the actual case), and so is saying everything needs to be set back to where it was, while the courts work through an actual legal decision.
ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
It's not a long document, but to take one of the example torts mentioned: torturous interference with a business contract is illegal, even if you own the means of interfering. Could matt/automattic/wordpress.org/wordpress.com (they all act as the same entity: matt) have withdrawn services in a way that didn't tortiously interfere with a business contract? Of course. But he didn't, because tortiously interfering with WPEngine's customer contracts was his primary goal. His complaints about cost were secondary at best, and seem to have been entirely a pretext. To add more perspective: withdrawing services from everybody usually requires one to simply stop working and/or paying bills. To withdraw services from WPEngine, matt had to consciously expend time/effort/money, just to interfere with WPEngine's customer contracts. Doing nothing would have been less work and cost matt less.
sonofhans 2y ago
“Tortious interference” is wrongful interference in others’ contractual or business relationships. Wordpress does not have to provide free services to anyone in particular, only to honor their legal agreements and treat their users equally. In this case they did not; they took action specifically to damage WPEngine. Matt may even be morally correct in some ways, but that doesn’t give him the right to use his position as Wordpress leader to damage the business of someone who competes with Automattic.

lesuorac 2y ago

> remove the purported list of WPEngine customers contained in the “domains.csv” file linked to Defendants’ wordpressenginetracker.com website (which was launched on or about November 7, 2024) and stored in the associated GitHub repository located at https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetracker.github.io https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetra.... Considering the only changes [1] [2] have been to add more sites to the list I guess there's going to be a second hearing to enforce the injunction. [1]: https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetracker.github.io/commits/trunk/ https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetra... [2]: https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetracker.github.io/commit/4c2848fc940c3b58ff76bffbade286fa887a3cff https://github.com/wordpressenginetracker/wordpressenginetra...

Crosseye_Jack 2y ago
> Within 72 hours, Defendants are ORDERED to: So they can add sites to the tracker GH right up to the 71 hour, then remove it and still be in compliance with the order. edit: as the WPEngine checkbox has been removed from https://login.wordpress.org/ https://login.wordpress.org/ since the order, I don't see why they won't also follow the order regrading the site tracker.
rnewme 2y ago
Removed 5min ago hmmmhm

dzonga 2y ago

matt is one of those inspirational people - like dhh, jason cohen people who built products from scratch and bootstrapped them. so it's sad seeing him go ape shit like that.

uncomplexity_ 2y ago
- https://ma.tt/2024/10/on-dhh/ https://ma.tt/2024/10/on-dhh/ - https://x.com/dhh/status/1845887043748221421 https://x.com/dhh/status/1845887043748221421 awful