This whole situation was handled poorly, but can it really be considered bullying? It definitely speaks to the heart of the eternal problem of open source: the imbalance of givers and takers at the bazaar.
This whole situation was handled poorly, but can it really be considered bullying? It definitely speaks to the heart of the eternal problem of open source: the imbalance of givers and takers at the bazaar.
The public license agreement that Automattic has says the license is "perpetual, irrevocable:" https://www.pluginvulnerabilities.com/2024/10/02/matt-mullen...
The license that exists for WordPress.org, which seems to really be just him, doesn't appear to be public. It would be interesting to see who it really is with and what the terms really are.
According to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41692300, Matt Mullenweg said at some point in that long interview from a couple of days ago that he was operating WordPress.org personally, rather than the WordPress Foundation as I think people would typically assume.
> > Do you really individually own http://WordPress.org?
> > Not Automattic? Not a different LLC or something? No employees? No board of directors?
> > Just you?
> Just me.
Matt's just mad he didn't capture the enterprise Wordpress hosting market earlier, with WordPress.com always being aimed at more casual users and Pressable only aquired in 2016.
WordPress.com VIP is a thing though, and I think they've done a great job selling it to huge organisations.
No it's much more like extortion.
And it goes against everything open source has been about.