Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by sharphall 636 days ago
For comparison, the text of the screenshotted web page (https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy/) now reads:

> 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.

This is kind of a wild change. And the change of tone about "WP" aside, it is very strange to make complaints like this on a trademark policy page of all places.

This whole thing is very bizarre and not a great look.

2 comments

I don’t think it’s a wild change. Explicitly enumerated or not, one might assume that any open-source trademark owner does not allow use of their trademark that implies connection to, or authority over, the root project or that “creates confusion”.

Take a look at the Red Hat Trademark guidelines page, which is based on the Model Trademark Guidelines (CC-BY-4.0) designed for the open-source community. They explicitly mention that you cannot “Use the Red Hat Marks in a way that expresses or implies sponsorship or endorsement by, or affiliation or a relationship with Red Hat when one does not exist.” They also remind you that “Red Hat, at its sole discretion, may terminate or modify your permission at any time. Red Hat retains and reserves all rights to the Red Hat Marks and their use, including the sole right to modify these Guidelines, with immediate or later effect.”

If the WordPress Foundation had explicitly included a similar reminder would you still find the change “wild”?

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/trademark-guidelines-and-pol...

Wow that reads incredibly petty, almost childish. And "billions of revenue"?
Odds that it was written by the CEO himself?
Likely they could buy Automattic if that were true.
Well they probably have made at least 1 billion over the lifetime of the company, it looks like their annual revenue is a couple hundred million. But multiple billions? And forgetting to say "dollars"? Does anyone proofread this stuff?