For many years, the official guidance on the trademark has explicitly been that WP was not the trademark and people should use that instead of WordPress. Tons and tons of people use WP in their businesses, domains, product names, etc.
The “confused consumers” thing feels like a manufactured justification for whatever this spat is.
The company is called WPEngine, sure, but their tagline says "Most trusted WordPress platform". Their plans are named "Essential WordPress", "Core WordPress", etc. Are those products they're selling, or just descriptions? There's enough gray area there to attract a lawyer's attention, which Mullenweg is clearly using to his advantage.
“Essential Blog Hosting Service using a Commonly Used Open Source Software That We Cannot Name”?
>"In other words, individuals are not compelled by trademark law to use "absurd turns of phrase" simply to avoid trademark liability."
Which I believe was their legal response. The problem is it should have stopped there.
I'm sure Matt's lawyers aren't very happy with him at the moment. Legally, it's usually not advantageous to retaliate so strongly and publicly. It greatly muddies the legal waters.
Really? I see extortion in those texts, not a legal lawsuit to enforce a trademark.
I mean, is this a legal and well crafted lawsuit? Or just extortion.
> Just called. Should I run these slides or not?
> Is next week a negotiation on the % or it happening at all? I am not going to be able to walk it back
> I know that this is the nuclear option, it sets us down a specific path