The blocked resources in question? Automatic security and features updates and plugin/theme repository access. Matt Mullenweg reasserted his claim that this was a trademark issue. In tandem, WordPress.org updated its Trademark Policy page to forbid WP Engine specifically (way after the Cease & Desist): from “you are free to use [‘WP’] n any way you see fit” to a diatribe:

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.

https://techcrunch.com/2024/09/26/wordpress-vs-wp-engine-drama-explained attempts to provide a full chronology so far.

Edit:

The WordPress Foundation, which owns the trademark, has also filed to trademark “Managed WordPress” and “Hosted WordPress.” Developers and providers are worried that if these trademarks are granted, they could be used against them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    139 days ago

    They explicitly call their engine Wordpress more than once in those examples. You cannot do that.

    • AatubeOP
      link
      fedilink
      -38 days ago

      Yes they can. It’s actually WordPress, so it’s nominative.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        99 days ago

        No, they can’t, because no, it isn’t. That’s what trademarks are for. You can’t use a trademarked name to refer to your competing product.

        Open source projects are generally permissive in terms of people repackaging their code for distribution for different platforms within reasonable guidelines, but even that is a sufficient change that they aren’t obligated to allow their trademarks to be used that way.

        It is no longer Wordpress once it’s modified. That’s what trademark is for.

        • AatubeOP
          link
          fedilink
          -68 days ago

          I think we should agree to disagree that it was modified enough here.

          • JackbyDev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            38 days ago

            I can’t go and modify something and violate their trademarks in the process lol.

            • AatubeOP
              link
              fedilink
              -28 days ago

              You can’t, and I’m disagreeing that what they were doing counts as modification.

              • JackbyDev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                38 days ago

                Did they change anything? If so, it’s modification.

                • AatubeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  08 days ago

                  That is the question. I think this is all perfectly achievable by only writing new, separate software to selectively gatekeep the configuration files without changing the source code of WordPress itself. Like I said, not dedicating more resources to WordPress.org doesn’t give WP Engine the moral high ground either, though.

                  • JackbyDev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    38 days ago

                    To be honest it doesn’t really matter if it’s modified or an entirely different product offering. It seems it is trying to muddy the waters with the name WP.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            78 days ago

            There is no “enough”. Any modification at all takes their permission to use their trademark.

            Most allow you to do so within reasonable guidelines, but that only gives you the benefit of the doubt if it’s ambiguous. As soon as they tell you that you don’t have permission to use their trademark on your altered version, you can’t use it.

            • AatubeOP
              link
              fedilink
              -38 days ago

              But is gatekeeping the configuration files or wrapping around the software really modification?