WP Engine vs Automattic: A Trademark Tangle or Corporate Warfare?

In the world of website development, the battle between WP Engine vs Automattic has emerged as a key conflict within the WordPress ecosystem. Automattic, the company behind WordPress.com, and WP Engine, a leading managed hosting provider for WordPress sites, are both major players, but their relationship has soured over trademark disputes, public criticism, and differing values. At the heart of the WP Engine vs Automattic conflict is the use of Automattic’s trademarks, with WP Engine’s branding often leading to confusion among users who mistakenly believe the two companies are directly affiliated. What began as a misunderstanding has escalated into lawsuits, accusations of corporate greed, and a broader debate about open-source ideals versus corporate profit motives. This article delves into the legal battles, public fallout, and deeper ideological tensions fueling the ongoing feud between WP Engine and Automattic.

1. Background: WP Engine and Automattic’s Relationship

WP Engine has become a powerful name in the hosting business, bringing in an estimated $400 million in revenue (according to this report). Owned by private equity firm Silverlake, which manages an astounding $102 billion in assets (according to a recent blog post on their website), WP Engine’s growth has been impressive. The company provides premium managed hosting solutions specifically tailored for WordPress, making it a go-to for businesses that need reliability and scalability. However, that very association with WordPress has sparked the tensions that underlie the current conflict.

On the other hand, Automattic, led by WordPress cofounder Matt Mullenweg, is the force behind WordPress.com, WooCommerce, and a suite of open-source tools that power millions of websites. Automattic is deeply committed to the principles of open-source software, regularly contributing to the WordPress community and fostering the development of free tools accessible to anyone. For Automattic, maintaining the integrity of its trademarks—particularly “WordPress” and “WooCommerce”—is critical to ensuring users understand the difference between open-source projects and private companies like WP Engine that profit from hosting services tied to the WordPress platform.

2. The Core Dispute of WP Engine vs Automattic: Trademark Confusion

The conflict between WP Engine vs Automattic centres on allegations that WP Engine has blurred the lines between its services and Automattic’s, leading to widespread confusion among customers. Many users mistakenly believe that WP Engine is directly owned or operated by Automattic, largely due to WP Engine’s use of the abbreviation “WP,” which many equate with “WordPress.” Automattic has raised concerns that WP Engine has taken advantage of this association without contributing meaningfully to the open-source community.

When WP Engine was established, the previous WordPress trademark policy clearly stated,

“The abbreviation ‘WP’ is not covered by the WordPress trademarks and you are free to use it in any way you see fit.”

This provided significant flexibility for companies like WP Engine to use “WP” without legal repercussions. However, this usage has led to widespread confusion, as many users have come to believe that WP Engine is officially connected to WordPress, particularly due to its prominance and arguably their brand and checkout process.

As of October 2024, the trademark policy was updated, reflecting Automattic’s growing concern over this confusion. The updated policy now states,

“The abbreviation ‘WP’ is not covered by the WordPress trademarks, but please don’t use it in a way that confuses people. For example, many people think WP Engine is ‘WordPress Engine’ and officially associated with WordPress, which it’s not. They have never once even donated to the WordPress Foundation, despite making billions of revenue on top of WordPress.”

This revision signals Automattic’s clearer stance on how “WP” should not be used to mislead customers into believing there is an official affiliation.

Whether WP Engine has caused significant confusion among users, is yet to be proven. According to Matt (in a recent interview) he implies some customers assumed  they were dealing directly with Automattic, a point of contention for them, which has spent years nurturing the WordPress brand and ensuring that its open-source philosophy remains intact. WP Engine has also been accused of using the WooCommerce name to market its services, further muddying the waters about its association with Automattic. Automattic argues that these actions have misled users into believing WP Engine’s services are officially connected to WordPress when, in fact, they are not.

Another key frustration for Automattic has been WP Engine’s practice of forking and modifying community plugins—such as those used with WooCommerce—and then charging customers for access to these altered versions. Even though we here at Spotlight have developed insode of WordPress for many years this is the 1st we’ve heard of these actions. Automattic feels this practice not only takes advantage of the open-source community’s work but also dilutes the original purpose of these plugins by removing or changing attributions. As both companies continue to dig in their heels, the public face of this dispute has become increasingly tense.

This controversy also raises questions about other large brands that incorporate “WP” into their names, such as WPBeginner, WPMU DEV, WPForms, and WP Astra. These companies have built their businesses around the WordPress platform, and their use of “WP” similarly suggests a close affiliation with WordPress itself. While these companies may not face direct legal action, the updated trademark policy and the evolving discourse around the use of “WP” indicate that they could face increased scrutiny in the future.

3. Legal Escalation: Lawsuits and Counteractions

As the tensions grew, the situation escalated into full-blown legal action. Silverlake, WP Engine’s parent company, seemed to initiated the first lawsuit (at least this is what was implied here), not only targeting Automattic but also taking the unusual step of a suit against Matt Mullenweg personally. This marked a significant turning point in the conflict, moving beyond public grievances to formal legal disputes.

In response, Automattic took a decisive and technical countermeasure. They blocked WP Engine’s direct access to WordPress.org’s servers, effectively forcing WP Engine to develop its own infrastructure to manage updates and services, which previously relied on free resources from WordPress.org. Automattic framed this as a necessary step to protect their open-source community. Matt Mullenweg stated in a personal blog “Why should WorPress.org provide these services to WP Engine for free, given their  attacks on us?”. Never shy to speak his mind, added fuel to the fire with his public comment on his blog, calling WP Engine’s modified WordPress system a “hacked-up bastardized simulacra of WordPress,” which was picked up quickly and has seemingly divided the WordPress community. This public attack, coupled with the lawsuits, set the stage for a deeply divisive debate on the future of WordPress’s open-source values. A further article on the official WordPress blog expands on some of these points.

WP Engine is banned from WordPress.org

4. Open Source vs. Corporate Greed: The Larger Debate

At the heart of this conflict lies a philosophical divide between the open-source ethos and the profit-driven goals of private equity-backed companies (aka Automattic Vs WP Engine). Automattic, under Matt’s leadership, has always championed the ideals of the open-source community. WordPress, along with its ecosystem of plugins like WooCommerce, thrives on the principle that software should be freely available to all, with companies contributing back to the community that builds these tools.

However, WP Engine, driven by its private equity owner Silverlake, is being accused of prioritising profits over these principles. Automattic’s core grievance is that WP Engine has benefitted massively from the open-source WordPress platform without making significant contributions in return. Instead of developing its own solutions or infrastructure, WP Engine allegedly relied on free services from WordPress.org while charging its customers premium rates.

Matt’s public statements have been harsh. He’s likened WP Engine’s private equity-backed approach to a “cancer” slowly eating away at the open-source community, suggesting that companies like WP Engine, if left unchecked, could ultimately hollow out what makes WordPress special. This rhetoric has resonated with many in the WordPress community, but it has also sparked criticism, as some see Matt’s comments as overly aggressive and counterproductive. These and simialr actions on other public platforms have caused additional litgation actions from WP Engine, you can read the full Cease and Desist Letter here with a snippet of it below:

Stunningly, Automattic’s CEO Matthew Mullenweg threatened that if WP Engine did not agree to pay Automattic – his for-profit entity – a very large sum of money before his September 20th keynote address at the WordCamp US Convention, he was going to embark on a self-described “scorched earth nuclear approach” toward WP Engine within the WordPress community and beyond. When his outrageous financial demands were not met, Mr. Mullenweg carried out his threats by making repeated false claims disparaging WP Engine to its employees, its customers, and the world.

5. Community Impact: Internal Struggles and Public Backlash

This legal and philosophical conflict has not only affected the companies involved but also rippled through the wider WordPress community. Within Automattic, tensions ran high after the lawsuits were filed. In a significant move, the company offered a voluntary redundancy package to employees who felt strongly opposed to the actions Automattic was taking. As a result, 159 employees—representing 8.4% of the workforce—chose to leave. This exodus highlighted the internal strain caused by the ongoing conflict, with some feeling uncomfortable with the direction Automattic was taking.

Externally, the battle has led to a significant public scrutiny. Many of WP Engines customers were unaware that WP Engine was not officially part of Automattic or WordPress itself, but can WP Engine be blamed for this? The legal dispute and Matt’s outspoken comments brought this misunderstanding to light, leading to customer dissatisfaction and even some publicly announcing their departure from WP Engine on social platforms like X (formerly Twitter).

This public disillusionment was compounded by the recent controversy around the Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) plugin, which was removed from the WordPress plugin directory. In a blog post by Iain Poulson, the author expressed concerns about Automattic’s increasing control over the WordPress ecosystem, echoing some of WP Engine’s criticisms and the fact that in the last 21 years (the whole lifespan of WordPress) A plugin under active development has never been unilaterally and forcibly taken away from its creator without consent. While it’s important to note that these are Poulson’s personal views, the removal of the ACF plugin has stirred debate about Automattic’s role in curating the plugin ecosystem and whether its decisions are aligned with the broader community’s interests.

The SCF plugin, (which used the original URL “/advanced-custom-fields”) a modified version of ACF now available in the WordPress plugin directory , has further complicated the narrative. Some view this as Automattic’s attempt to replace (or forcibly takeover) a critical tool with one that it controls more directly, adding another layer to the open-source versus corporate control debate.

6. Personal Reflection: Is It Tit-for-Tat?

Reflecting on the situation, it’s hard not to see some degree of tit-for-tat behaviour on both sides. While WP Engine may have invertedly started the conflict by stretching the boundaries of open source trademarks and WP usage reportedly confusing customers about their affiliation with WordPress and WooCommerce, Automattic’s responses, particularly Matt’s public statements, have escalated the feud to a new level.

The latest developments, such as Automattic’s SCF plugin being seen by some as a response to WP Engine’s tactics with WooCommerce plugins, further fuel the idea that this conflict has become more about personal vendettas than what is actually best for the community. Matt’s infamous blog post about WP Engine’s “bastardized” version of WordPress and the petty controversies, like the new checkbox on the WordPress login page, give the impression that the dispute has veered into more personal territory.

That said, the philosophical stakes remain high. At the core, this is a battle over whether WordPress, as an open-source platform, can retain its community-driven roots in the face of corporate interests. Whether you side with the ideal of protecting open-source software or see WP Engine’s private equity-fuelled approach as simply business as usual in a competitive market, it’s clear that neither side is willing to back down. Silverlake’s refusal to negotiate over the 8% trademark licensing fee or rebrand, and Automattic’s increasingly hardline stance, indicate that this dispute won’t be resolved any time soon.

7. Conclusion: What’s at Stake?

At its heart, the dispute between WP Engine vs Automattic represents more than just a legal wrangle over trademarks—it’s a microcosm of a larger battle being waged across the tech world: the conflict between open-source principles and the corporate drive for profit. Automattic’s efforts to safeguard the integrity of its trademarks, and by extension the open-source WordPress ecosystem, are emblematic of the challenges faced by any community-driven project when private equity-backed companies seek to capitalise on the same space.

WP Engine, backed by Silverlake, is playing by the rules of the corporate world, leveraging existing tools and systems to maximise profit while pushing the limits of what’s acceptable under open-source licenses. Automattic, on the other hand, views this approach as a fundamental threat to the WordPress community’s long-term health. Their fear is that unchecked corporate greed could eventually erode the collaborative, open-source spirit that has made WordPress the success it is today.

But this battle has taken on personal dimensions as well. Matt Mullenweg’s public comments, including labelling WP Engine’s practices as cancerous to the community, have stirred up strong reactions, both in support and against. While many sympathise with his desire to protect WordPress, others have criticised his aggressive tactics and, at times, childish antics. As this conflict rages on, the WordPress community itself remains divided—torn between the ideals of open-source collaboration and the reality of private sector dominance.

What’s clear is that this conflict isn’t just about the WordPress trademark or how plugins are managed. It’s about the future direction of WordPress itself. Will it remain a community-driven platform with its open-source roots intact, or will it increasingly become a battlefield for companies to carve out profits from its vast user base (estimated to power in excess of 40% of the worlds websites)? While both sides have made their positions clear, neither seems ready to compromise, leaving the future uncertain.

As users and developers in the WordPress ecosystem, it’s crucial to watch this dispute closely, as its outcome may set precedents for how similar battles between open-source projects and private corporations are resolved. For now, the question remains: can open-source ideals coexist with corporate ambition, or will one ultimately dominate? Time will tell.