EN 
FR_FR 
WordPress creator Matt Mullenweg is criticizing hosting provider WP Engine for using the open source CMS without commensurate contributions, creating tensions in the community.
Sommaire
At the heart of the controversy over WP Engine's Austin, Texas headquarters: a battle involving WordPress.
WordPress, which powers nearly 40,000 of the world’s websites, is currently embroiled in a feud between its founder, Matt Mullenweg, and WP Engine, a leading provider of WordPress-optimized hosting. The situation is creating divisions over issues of contribution, governance, and trademark usage. BDM gathered insights from Core Committer Jean-Baptiste Audras to get a better handle on the issue.
Contribution and responsibility in question
It all started with a critical article by Matt Mullenweg published in September 2024, where he compares WP Engine to a “cancer” for WordPress, denouncing their lack of contribution despite huge profits. He criticizes WP Engine for capitalizing on WordPress’ popularity without providing any meaningful return. “As a member of the WordPress ecosystem, those who profit from it are expected to contribute in return,” explains Jean-Baptiste Audras.
Despite their status as an independent company with annual revenues of around $500 million, WP Engine is reportedly being charged a very limited contribution, which Mullenweg finds paltry. “My agency, which is much smaller, contributes more,” Audras points out. This case raises the ethical question for companies operating open source projects.
Brands, images and confusion: the issue of the term “WP”
In addition to the contributions, the use of the name "WP" has further fueled tensions, as Mullenweg believes it can be misleading and suggest official affiliation. The WordPress Foundation has since clarified its policy on the brand.
While “WP” is not a registered trademark of WordPress, the foundation has clarified that it should not be used to mislead users. Mullenweg accuses WP Engine of muddying the waters with the name, while contributing little. This criticism prompted WP Engine to send a cease and desist letter to Automattic, stating that their use of “WP” is legitimate under intellectual property laws.
Consequences for users and the community
The situation got worse when Mullenweg decided to restrict WordPress.org's WP Engine, limiting its customers' access to automatic updates. Jean-Baptiste Audras warns of the security risks in the absence of these updates.
WP Engine has responded by creating an alternative to WordPress.org resources to protect its customers. This reveals the extent of their reliance on WordPress’s centralized environment. Audras notes that this control exerted by Automattic and the WordPress Foundation over companies is being felt.
Fractures within the community?
The incident highlights tensions over how such conflicts are handled. "The reasoning behind the action is sound, but the method used is controversial," Audras concedes. The community is divided over the approach, with some fearing precedents that could punish small businesses.
The temporary lifting of restrictions on WP Engine raises the question of the balance between openness and the contributions required from businesses. It also challenges the governance of open source, encouraging solutions that maintain the essence of WordPress while adapting to today's business requirements.
