The WPEngine Preliminary Injunction Against Automattic: A Detailed Breakdown

As a long-time WordPress user and advocate of open-source software, I’ve followed the recent legal proceedings between WPEngine and Automattic with keen interest. The case involves WPEngine’s application for injunctive relief against Automattic Inc. and its CEO, Matt Mullenweg. The issues at play here are deeply relevant to the WordPress community and raise questions about governance, fair competition, and the responsibilities of key players in the ecosystem.

Below, I’ve outlined the key facts and outcomes of the injunction application in a clear, concise manner.

You can find the original Injunction, filed yesterday in California, here.

---

Background of the Dispute

1. Parties Involved:
   • WPEngine: A company providing managed WordPress hosting, plugins, and tools, dedicated exclusively to the WordPress ecosystem.
   • Automattic: The organisation behind WordPress.com, WooCommerce, and other WordPress-related services. Matt Mullenweg, co-founder of WordPress, serves as Automattic’s CEO and manages the WordPress.org website.
2. Key Allegations by WPEngine:
   • Automattic and Mullenweg allegedly interfered with WPEngine’s access to WordPress.org, blocking their ability to update or maintain plugins hosted on the platform.
   • They are accused of unauthorised modifications to WPEngine’s popular plugin, Advanced Custom Fields (ACF), including renaming it and redirecting its user base.
   • Claims of extortionate behaviour, including demands for licensing fees amounting to 8% of WPEngine’s gross revenue.
   • Public comments and actions by Mullenweg purportedly aimed at damaging WPEngine’s reputation.
3. Relief Sought by WPEngine:
   • Immediate cessation of interference with their access to WordPress.org resources.
   • Restoration of the status quo for their plugins and resources as of September 20, 2024.
   • Prevention of further tortious or extortionate acts by Automattic and Mullenweg.

---

Outcomes of the Preliminary Injunction

On December 10, 2024, the court granted WPEngine’s motion for a preliminary injunction with modifications. Here’s what the injunction entails:

1. Restoration of Access

Automattic and Mullenweg are required to:

• Restore WPEngine’s access to WordPress.org and related resources as they existed before September 20, 2024.
• Ensure WPEngine and its users can update and manage plugins, themes, and other WordPress community resources without restriction.

“Defendants are enjoined from interfering with or causing others to interfere with WPEngine’s and/or its free users’, customers’, or partners’ access to the WordPress community, including wordpress.org and the WordPress Plugin Directory and repository.”

2. Prohibition of Plugin Modifications

The court barred Defendants from:

• Altering WPEngine’s plugins, such as the ACF plugin, without authorisation.
• Misrepresenting the authorship or source of plugins.

“Defendants must refrain from interfering with WPEngine’s control over plugins or extensions published by WPEngine as of September 20, 2024.”

3. Reversal of Actions

Automattic must:

• Reverse any unauthorised changes made to WPEngine’s plugins, directories, or related software.
• Restore the status quo ante unless changes were made for legitimate, non-tortious reasons.

“Any restriction of access or alteration of a plugin or extension that would have violated the above terms must immediately be undone, restoring the status quo as it existed prior to September 20, 2024.”

4. Prevention of Extortionate Behaviour

Defendants are prohibited from:

• Engaging in extortionate demands or actions targeting WPEngine’s operations, customers, or partners.

“Defendants are enjoined from engaging in any extortionate acts or tortious interference with respect to WPEngine and its customers, partners, or users.”

5. Scope of the Injunction

The injunction applies broadly to Automattic, Mullenweg, their officers, employees, and any associated entities or individuals.

“This order applies to Defendants and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, as well as any individuals or entities acting in concert with them.”

---

When Will This Need to Happen?

The court required compliance with the injunction within 72 hours of its issuance on December 10, 2024. Key directives included:

• Removal of Domains List: The domains.csv file, which listed WPEngine customers and was linked to the wordpressenginetracker.com website, was to be entirely removed.
• Restoration of Access: WPEngine’s and its affiliates’ access to WordPress.org resources, including login credentials and any restricted IPs, was to be reinstated immediately.
• Correction of Plugin Listings: Any modifications, such as the checkbox requiring users to confirm non-affiliation with WPEngine, were to be removed, and control of plugins like ACF was to be fully restored to WPEngine.

“Within 72 hours, Defendants are ORDERED to:
(a) remove the purported list of WPEngine customers contained in the ‘domains.csv’ file linked to Defendants’ wordpressenginetracker.com website…
(b) restore WPEngine’s and Related Entities’ access to wordpress.org as it existed as of September 20, 2024, including:
(i) reactivating and restoring all WPEngine employee login credentials to wordpress.org resources…
(ii) disabling any technological blocking of WPEngine’s and Related Entities’ access to wordpress.org…
(iii) restoring WPEngine’s and Related Entities’ access to wordpress.org in the manner that such access existed as of September 20, 2024, including…
(iv) removing the checkbox at login.wordpress.org that Defendants added…
(v) returning and restoring WPEngine’s access to and control of its Advanced Custom Fields (‘ACF’) plugin directory listing…”

This swift timeline underscores the court’s recognition of the urgency in addressing the harm caused to WPEngine and restoring fairness within the WordPress ecosystem.

---

Court’s Rationale

The court’s decision was based on the following findings:

1. Likelihood of Success:
   • WPEngine demonstrated a strong case for tortious interference with contractual relations, supported by evidence of Defendants’ actions and public statements.
2. Irreparable Harm:
   • The inability to update plugins, coupled with reputational damage and loss of customer trust, was deemed irreparable harm.
3. Balance of Equities:
   • The court found that the harm to WPEngine outweighed any inconvenience to Automattic, tipping the balance of equities in WPEngine’s favour.
4. Public Interest:
   • Maintaining fair competition and ensuring the integrity of the WordPress ecosystem aligned with the public interest.

---

Implications for the WordPress Community

This case highlights critical issues for WordPress users and developers:

• Governance and Fair Play: The allegations raise questions about the role of key stakeholders in ensuring open-source principles are upheld.
• Transparency in Decision-Making: The dispute underscores the need for greater transparency in how decisions affecting the ecosystem are made.
• Protection of Community Contributions: The injunction reinforces the importance of respecting contributors’ work and maintaining trust within the community.

---

Closing Thoughts

As a long-time WordPress user, I find this case both fascinating and concerning. While the injunction is a temporary measure, it sends a clear message about the importance of fair competition and ethical behaviour within the WordPress ecosystem. The broader implications for open-source governance will likely be a topic of discussion for years to come.

I’ll continue to follow this case closely and share updates as they unfold. If you have thoughts or insights, feel free to share them in the comments below.